L  si 


.--,  ’-./if 


«s  Sil  :■ 


h-T 

y  ■ 


-  V  ’ 

!  '  V  -  ' 


' 


'  *.•  " 


::  .v,  •  :■;{ 

.■I 

i:  j  t 

::  ‘ 

i  '■  ■  ■  * 


^  !$  a.  ''S^r« 
;;l~VkSr  agfegSS 

[JCEfcSjr  >  «^/,«>  >£*■>?  jjKTr r'S’>V‘'ai.V  j 

v'iSi-v  •‘>v ••  'A  , 


: 


.'A 


r,i: 


VOL.  II,  NO.  13 


MAY  1,  1923 


UNIVERSITY  EXTENSION  DIVISION 


University  of  North  Carolina 
Extension  Bulletin 


AGRICULTURAL  GRAPHICS: 


NORTH  CAROLINA  AND  THE  UNITED  STATES 


1866-1922 


By  H.  R.  SMEDES 


THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  NORTH  CAROLINA  PRESS 
CHAPEL  HILL,  N.  C. 

Entered  as  Second-Class  Matter 


!wt&:  aVvA-A 

'  '.  t  -.'.uV  : 


tV 


: 


vy'Tv-?\  :z 


r._- 


& 


St- 


A', 


i&  o 


l-»  -  A 


University  of  North  Carolina 
Extension  Bulletin 

AGRICULTURAL  GRAPHICS: 

NORTH  CAROLINA  AND  THE  UNITED  STATES 

1866-1922 


By  HENRIETTA  R.  SMEDES 

LIBRARIAN  AND  LABORATORY  ASSISTANT 
DEPARTMENT  RURAL  SOCIAL  ECONOMICS 
UNIVERSITY  OF  NORTH  CAROLINA 


THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  NORTH  CAROLINA  PRESS 
CHAPEL  HILL,  N.  C. 


The  well-being  of  a  people  is  like  a  tree;  agriculture  is  its 
root,  manufacture  and  commerce  are  its  branches  and  its  life; 
if  the  root  is  injured  the  leaves  fall,  the  branches  break  away, 
and  the  tree  dies. — Chinese  Philosopher. 

Agriculture  is  not  only  an  occupation  which  some  individuals 
follow  for  profit,  it  is  a  great  national  interest  determining 
in  a  dominant  way  the  fortunes  of  the  nation  and  the  oppor¬ 
tunities  and  the  character  of  the  populations. — Dr.  James  W. 
Robertson. 


CONTENTS 


/ 


PAGE 

Prefatory  Explanation .  5-7 

Aggregate  Crop  Values,  North  Carolina  and  United  States,  Yearly 

and  Trend,  1909-1922 .  7-10 

Aggregate  Crop  Values,  North  Carolina  and  United  States,  Five- 

Year  Average  1917-1921 .  10 

Proportion, of  Important  United  States  Crops  Produced  in  the  Five 
Leading  States  and  in  North  Carolina,  Five-Year  Average 
1917-1921  . . .  11-12 

Acreage,  Yield  Per  Acre,  Total  Production,  Farm  Price  Per  Unit 
December  1,  Total  Value  and  Value  Per  Acre  of  Important 

Crops,  North  Carolina  and  United  States,  1866-1922 .  12-38 

Corn  .  12-17 

Wheat  .  17-20 

Oats  .  20-23 

Potatoes  .  23-28 

Hay  .  29-33 

Cotton  . 32-34 

Tobacco  .  34-38 

Other  Crops  . 38 

Livestock:  Number,  Farm  Price  Per  Head  January  1,  and  Total 
Value  for  Farm  Animals,  North  Carolina  and  United  States, 

1867-1923  .  38-47 

Horses  and  Mules  . 39-44 

Milch  Cows  and  Other  Cattle  .  42-44 

Sheep  and  Swine  .  44-47 

Food  Production  as  Compared  With  Population .  47-50 

General  Considerations  .  50-51 


2 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2019  with  funding  from 
University  of  North  Carolina  at  Chapel  Hill 


https://archive.org/details/agriculturalgrap03smed 


AGRICULTURAL  GRAPHICS: 

NORTH  CAROLINA  AND  THE  UNITED  STATES 

1866-1922 


This  bulletin  presents  the  results  of  several  years  of  pains¬ 
taking  and  minute  research  in  government  crop  and  live  stock 
statistics.  The  figures  upon  which  the  charts  and  graphs  are 
based  are  all  official  figures — returns  of  the  federal  Bureau  of 
the  Census  for  census  years  and  estimates  of  the  United  States 
Department  of  Agriculture  for  intervening  years. 

Throughout  the  bulletin  census  figures  are  given  in  italics. 
The  Department  of  Agriculture’s  estimates  are  based  primarily 
on  census  figures  carried  forward  from  year  to  year  through 
percentage  estimates  made  on  the  basis  of  returns  from  a  host 
of  crop  reporters  and  field  agents,  and  every  possible  side-light 
on  the  problems  considered  is  utilized  by  the  Department  in  its 
estimates.  However  there  is  an  unavoidable  tendency  towards 
cumulative  error  in  estimates  of  acreage  as  the  distance  from 
the  actual  census  year  increases,  and  consequently  the  estimates 
for  the  later  years  in  the  inter-census  periods  are  apt  to  show 
considerable  variation  from  the  actual  census  figures  when  these 
become  available.  The  Department  of  Agriculture  has  in  some 
instances  revised  its  original  estimates  for  such  years,  so  as  to 
conform  more  nearly  to  ascertained  fact ;  and  in  all  cases  where 
revisions  have  been  made  the  latest  estimates  are  here  used.  In 
census  years  the  Department  of  Agriculture’s  estimates,  made 
prior  to  the  taking  of  the  census,  are  shown  in  addition  to  the 
census  figures,  so  as  to  exhibit  the  extent  of  the  variation  between 
the  estimates  of  the  Department  of  Agriculture  and  the  actual 
census  figures.  The  department  officials  have  been  most  kind 
in  supplying,  upon  request,  copies  of  hitherto  unpublished  data 
from  office  records,  and  the  writer,  who  was  for  many  years  em¬ 
ployed  in  close  association  with  statistical  experts  of  the  present 
Bureau  of  Agricultural  Economics,  has  had  the  training  req¬ 
uisite  for  the  handling  of  such  material. 


6 


Agricultural  Graphics 


The  fifty-seven-year  period  covered,  1866  to  1922,  is  that 
for  which  an  unbroken  series  of  comparable  statistics  can  be 
supplied.  The  findings  pointed  out  in  this  bulletin  are  such  as 
are  plainlv  revealed  by  even  a  superficial  examination  of  the 
statistics  presented.  These  statistics  will  repay  further  close 
study.  They  can  be  used  in  many  ways  in  working  towards 
solving  our  various  state  agricultural  and  industrial  problems. 

The  points  covered  are : 

I.  Crops 

1.  Aggregate  value  of  crops:  North  Carolina  and  the  United 
States,  1909-1922.  Table  I. 

Chart  1.  Percent  of  United  States  aggregate  crop  values 
produced  in  North  Carolina,  1909-1922. 

Chart  2.  Increase  in  aggregate  crop  values  over  1909,  North 
Carolina  and  the  United  States,  1909-1922. 

2.  Aggregate  crop  values,  five-year  average,  1917-1921 : 

Chart  3.  Proportion  of  aggregate  United  States  crop  val¬ 
ues  produced  in  the  five  leading  states  and  in  North  Carolina. 

Chart  4.  Proportion  of  aggregate  United  States  crop  values 
represented  by  important  crops. 

Chart  5.  Proportion  of  aggregate  North  Carolina  crop  values 
represented  by  the  same  crops. 

3.  Proportion  of  important  crops  produced  in  the  five  lead¬ 
ing  states  and  in  North  Carolina,  five-year  average  1917-21. 

Charts  6  to  13 — corn,  wheat,  oats,  potatoes,  sweet  potatoes, 
hay,  cotton,  and  tobacco. 

4.  Acreage,  yield  per  acre,  total  production,  farm  price  per 
unit  December  1,  total  value,  and  value  per  acre  of  important 
crops,  North  Carolina  and  the  United  States,  1866-1922.  Tables 
II  to  IX. 

Corn:  Trends  in  yield  per  acre,  farm  price  per  bushel,  and 
value  per  acre.  Table  II  and  charts  14  to  16. 

Wheat:  Trends  in  yield  per  acre,  farm  price  per  bushel,  and 
value  per  acre.  Table  III  and  charts  17  to  19. 

Oats :  Trends  in  yield  per  acre,  farm  price  per  bushel,  and 
value  per  acre.  Table  IV  and  charts  20  to  22. 

Irish  potatoes:  Trends  in  yield  per  acre,  farm  price  per 
bushel,  and  value  per  acre.  Table  V  and  charts  23  to  25. 


Agricultural  Graphics 


7 


Sweet  potatoes:  Trends  in  yield  per  acre,  farm  price  per 
bushel,  and  value  per  acre.  Table  VI  and  charts  26  to  28. 

Hay,  tame:  Trends  in  yield  per  acre,  farm  price  per  ton,  and 
value  per  acre.  Table  VII  and  charts  29  to  31. 

Cotton:  Trends  in  yield  per  acre,  farm  price  per  pound,  and 
value  per  acre.  Table  VIII  and  charts  32  to  34. 

Tobacco:  Trends  in  yield  per  acre,  farm  price  per  pound, 
and  value  per  acre.  T  able  IX  and  charts  35  to  37. 

5.  Other  crops. 

II.  Livestock 

1.  Number,  farm  price  per  head  January  1,  and  total  value 
for  farm  animals,  North  Carolina  and  the  United  States,  1867- 
1923.  Tables  X  to  XII. 

Horses  and  Mules:  Trends  in  farm  price  per  head.  Table 
X  and  charts  38  and  39. 

Milk  Cows  and  Other  Cattle:  Trends  in  farm  price  per  head. 
Table  XI  and  charts  40  and  41. 

Sheep  and  Swine:  Trends  in  farm  price  per  head.  Table 

XII  and  charts  42  and  43. 

III.  Food  Production 

1.  Food  production  as  compared  with  population.  Tables 

XIII  and  XIV  and  charts  44  and  45. 

2.  General  considerations. 

L  Crops 

1.  Aggregate  value  of  crops:  North  Carolina  and  the  United 
States,  1909-1922. 

The  figures  presented  in  table  1  and  charts  1  and  2  are  more 
suggestive  than  authoritative. 

The  Department  of  Agriculture’s  hypothetical  estimates  of 
aggregate  crop  values  are  based  on  the  assumption  that  the 
several  crops  whose  production  the  department  estimates  from 
year  to  year  (at  present  some  twenty-two  in  number)  represent 
each  year  the  same  proportion  of  total  crop  values  that  they  rep¬ 
resented  in  the  previous  census  year.  This  is  only  roughly  true, 
and  any  unusual  or  disproportionate  increase  or  decrease  in  the 
value  of  some  particular  crop  distorts  the  reliability  of  the  esti- 


8 


Agricultural  Graphics 


TABLE  I— AGGREGATE  VALUE  OF  CROPS: 
N.  C.  AND  U.  S.,  1909-1922 


Year 

NORTH  CAROLINA 

Hypothetical  value  of  all  crops 

UNITED  STATES 
Hypothetical  value  of 

all  crops 

Rank 

Per  cent 

U.  S.  Total 
Produced 
in  State 

State  Total 

1000  Dolls. 

Per  cent  of 

1909  Value 

U.  S.  Total 

1000  Dolls. 

Per  cent  of 

1909  Value 

1909 _ 

19 

2.5 

131,072 

100.0 

5,231,851 

100.0 

1810 

3.0 

169,496 

129.3 

5,727,398 

109.5 

1911 _ 

2.9 

170,296 

129.9 

5,834,685 

111.5 

1919 

3.1 

184,139 

140.5 

5^964,011 

114.0 

1913 

3.4 

208,615 

159.2 

6', 178, 691 

118.1 

1914 _ 

16 

2.8 

173.497 

132.4 

6,262,835 

119.7 

1915 _ 

16 

2.9 

197,185 

150.4 

6,768,598 

129.4 

1916 _ 

11 

3.0 

272,076 

207.6 

•  8,985,870 

171.8 

1917 _ 

11 

3.2 

434,093 

331.2 

13,506,669 

256.3 

1918.  „ 

5 

4.0 

565,608 

431.5 

14,094,384 

269.3 

1919 _ 

12 

3.4 

503,229 

383.9 

lit, 755, 365 

282.0 

1920 _ _ 

11 

3.5 

353,169 

269.4 

10,197,092 

194.9 

1921 _ 

6 

3.9 

252,376 

192.5 

6,410,229 

122.5 

1922 _ 

5 

4.0 

342,637 

261.4 

8,501,395 

162.5 

mated  aggregate.  However,  such  distortions  tend  to  neutralize 
one  another  in  considering  averages  for  a  series  of  years,  and 
therefore  the  figures  exhibited  may  be  used  as  a  rough  measuring 
rod  in  determining  our  progress  in  the  production  of  crop  values. 

It  will  be  noted  (chart  1)  that  whereas  in  1909  North  Caro¬ 
lina’s  crops  represented  only  2.5  percent  of  the  total  United 
States  crop  values,  in  1922  they  had  risen  to  4.0  percent  of  the 
total.  Furthermore,  the  upward  trend,  as  shown  by  using  a  series 
of  moving  averages  for  five-year  periods,  has  been  absolutely 
unmistakable  and  perfectly  regular,  with  marked  acceleration 
in  the  later  years. 

That  we  are  indeed  a  favored  people  is  shown  strikingly  in 
chart  2.  Here  the  percent  of  increase  from  year  to  year  in  ag¬ 
gregate  crop  values  in  North  Carolina  over  our  1909  crop  values 
is  shown  in  comparison  with  the  similar  percent  of  increase  in 
the  United  States.  The  1909  figures  for  the  state  and  for  the 
United  States  are  taken  as  a  starting  point,  and  the  percent 
of  gain  in  North  Carolina  is  unfailingly  much  above  the  per¬ 
cent  of  gain  in  the  United  States.  Had  the  United  State*  as  a 


Percent  _  Percent 


Agricultural  Graphics 


9 


«n 

o 

c~> 


5.0 

4.5 

40 

3.5 
30 
Z5 
2.0 

1.5 

1.0 


o 

o 


—  Si 

<T)  <n 


2 

<D 


± 

c> 


iO 

o 


O) 


cn 


^  ^  —  —  <N 

<r>  cr> 


co 

o 


cr> 


o  — 


<r> 


C\i 

O) 


» 

\ 

\ 

—  * 

t 

/ 

/ 

/ 

/ 

.**'*'* 

** 

_ 

N.C.j 

N.C. 

_ 

/ear 

aver 

_ 

y.pe 
age  1 

rcerr 

"or  5 

_ 

v  & 
year 

_ 

US.  c 

'3  en 

_ 

:rop  \ 
ding 

L_J 

''Glue: 

iny£ 

_ 

jars 

_ 

indict 

_ 

ated 

L _ 

5.0 

45 

4.0 

3.5 
3.0 

2.5 
2.0 

1.5 
1.0 


CHART  1. — PER  CENT  OP  TOTAL  UNITED  STATES  CROP 
VALUES  PRODUCED  IN  NORTH  CAROLINA 


CHART  2. — INCREASE  IN  AGGREGATE  CROP  VALUES 
OVER  1909  VALUES:  N.  C.  AND  THE  U.  S.,  1909-1922 


Percent  Percent 


10 


Agricultural  Graphics 


whole  gained  as  much  as  North  Carolina  has  in  crop  values  since 
1909,  the  aggregate  for  the  United  States  in  1922  would  have 
been  over  thirteen  and  a  half  billion  dollars,  instead  of  eight  and 
a  half  billions. 

2.  Aggregate  crop  values,  five-year  average  1917-21. 

Chart  3  shows  our  standing  and  that  of  the  leading  five  states 
in  crop  values  for  the  five-year  period  1917-21.  We  have  not 
yet  maintained  our  values  for  a  period  long  enough  to  admit 
us  to  the  ranks  of  the  leading  five  states  in  an  average  covering 
five  years ;  but  the  1922  figures  show  that  we  were  within  the 
fold  of  the  elect  last  year,  and  it  seem 6  likely  that  we  may  retain 
the  rank  we  have  reached  in  recent  years.  All  1922  figures  are 
subject  to  revision  in  December,  1923,  therefore  they  have  not 
been  used  in  the  averages  here  given. 

Charts  4  and  5  show  an  interesting  contrast  between  the  crops 
that  have  made  the  fortune  of  the  United  States  as  a  whole  and 
those  that  have  raised  North  Carolina  into  prominence.  The 
eight  crops  considered  (corn,  wheat,  oats,  potatoes,  sweet  pota¬ 
toes,  hay,  cotton  and  tobacco)  for  the  five-year  period  1917-21 


Chart  3 


Five  Leading  States 


6.3 

5.7 

5.5 

3.8 

38*581 

4 2  5  TATES  71.3  7o 

% 

% 

t 

7c 

%  Ly 

Tex  III  Ia  0.  Cal  N.C 

-Aggregate  Crop  Values  C Hypothetical),  Five-Year  Average  1917-192! 


US.  =  S  11.792,748,000  =  100.0  PerCent. 


Chart  4 


US 

100  7. 


PerCent  of  Aggregate  Crop  Values  (Hypothetical)  for  1917-1921 
Represented  by  Crops  Specified.  U.S;  $  11,792,748,  000  -  100  0  PerCent 


Sweet  Potatoes  0  9  7. 


Corn 

Hay  12  37. 

WHEXTim 

Cotton 

Oats 

Pot- 

T. 

bxc 

Other  Crops  24  37. 

1167. 

6.0% 

ah>c 

4,?1 

CO 

ail 

Chart  5 


*-0ats  0  8% 


N.C. 

Tobacco  25  7  7o 

Cotton  22.8 

Corn  i9.0% 

K 

V- 

-«r 

cn 

£ 

£ 

r 

Other  Crops 

■n 

£ 

EO 

20. 4% 

Potatoes  1.57c-’’ 


PerCent  of  NC  Aggregate  Crop  Values  (Hypothetical)  tor  I9l7~l92i 
Represented  by  Crops  Specified.  NC  =  $  421,695.000  =  100  0  Per  Cent 


Agricultural  Graphics 


11 


CHARTS  6  TO  13. — PROPORTION  OF  IMPORTANT  CROPS  PRODUCED 
IN  THE  FIVE  LEADING  STATES  AND  IN  NORTH  CAROLINA 


Iowa  142  % 


Ills.  Il.57« 


N  £3  7®  Mo.  6.41 


Ikq  621 


42  5tates  52.8  7« 


Corn  U.S 

Five-Year  Average.  Production  1917-1921  =  2.931.271.000  Bushels  or  IDO  0% 

■nc.  c.7% _ 


Kama  13  9% 

N.D.9ZJ 

Ills. 

Nes 

CklJ 

6-Z% 

5-V. 

56j 

42  States  50 7% 


Wheat  U.5. 

Five-Year  Average  Production  1917-1321=  834, 801,000  Bushels  or  100.0% 


Iowa  15.8% 

Ills.  12.5% 

Mikn  86Z 

W1S.6.6Z 

Heb57j 

42  States  50.5% 

Oats  U.S. 

Five-Year  Average  Production  1317-1921  -  1,37 7,303,000  Bushels  or  100  0% 

H  C  iZ% _ 


NY  9.5% 


Me-' 


42  States  58.07° 


Potatoes  U.S. 

Five-Year  Average  Production  1317-1921-  308 , 358, ooo  Bushels  or  100  0% 


5vyeet  Potatoes,  U  5. 

FTve-Year  Average  Production  1917-1921  =  S4,230,000  Bushels^  1000% 
_ 09% _ 


NY7l% 

Cal 

Idwa 

Ohio!  42  States  70.7% 

54% 

5-H 

s4_ 

Hay  (Tame).  U5 

Five-Year  Average  Production  |917~I92I-  83,312.000  Tons  -  1000% 


Texas  275% 

6a.  14  0% 

5.C.  118% 

ArkT.Q 

Miss.  8.5  m 

Other  States  224% 


Cotton,  U.5i 

Five-Year  Average  Production  I917~l92l  =  11,232,000  Bales= 100.0% 


Ya  101% 


Tenh 

Ohio 

6.3%, 

5-3% 

Other  States  22 4% 


Tobacco,  U.5. 

Five -Year  Average  Production  1917-1921=  1.361.149,000  Pounds=I00.0% 


3 


12 


Agricultural  Graphics 


represented  in  the  United  States,  considered  as  a  whole,  75.7 
percent  of  the  aggregate  crop  values,  and  in  North  Carolina  79.6 
percent  of  such  aggregate  values.  But  in  the  United  States 
at  large  the  food  and  feed  crops  furnished  by  far  the  greater 
'proportion  of  the  values,  whereas  in  North  Carolina  the  only 
food  crop  that  constitutes  any  considerable  percentage  of  the 
total  state  crop  values  is  corn — 19  percent,  while  tobacco  and 
cotton  together  represent  48.5  percent  of  the  aggregate. 

3.  This  point  is  further  emphasized  in  charts  6  to  13,  which 
show  the  proportion  of  important  crops  produced  in  the  lead¬ 
ing  states  and  in  North  Carolina,  on  the  basis  of  their  five-year 
averages  1917-21.  When  the  different  crops  are  distributed  ac¬ 
cording  to  the  states  which  furnished  the  largest  percentages,  it 
is  seen  at  a  glance  that  sweet  potatoes  are  the  only  food  crop  of 
which  we  furnish  any  considerable  proportion  in  the  United 
States  total  production.  Our  corn  crop,  which  accounts  for  19 
percent  of  our  own  aggregate  crop  values,  represents  only  1.9 
percent  of  the  total  corn  crop  of  the  country,  whereas  we  pro¬ 
duce  10.4  percent  of  the  total  sweet  potato  crop  and  nearly  a 
quarter  of  the  tobacco  crop  of  the  United  States.  Sweet  potatoes 
and  tobacco  are  the  two  crops  in  whose  production  we  stand 
among  the  leading  five  states  on  a  five-year  average,  1917-21. 
Figures  for  1922  and  1921  show  us  among  the  first  five  states  in 
cotton  as  well,  but  how  long  we  can  maintain  this  position  now 
that  the  boll  weevil  has  gotten  us  into  his  clutches  remains  to  be 
seen. 

4.  Tables  II  to  IX  and  charts  14  to  37  present  details  of 
the  crops  of  corn,  wheat,  oats,  potatoes,  sweet  potatoes,  hay,  cot¬ 
ton,  and  tobacco  in  North  Carolina  and  the  United  States  from 
1866  to  1922.  These  tables  and  charts  constitute  a  statistical 
history  of  these  particular  crops  for  the  entire  period  for  which 
consecutive  data  are  available.  The  estimates  of  acreage  and 
production  shown  may  not  in  particular  years  represent  closely 
actual  facts,  but  they  are  fairly  comparable  and  they  do  repre¬ 
sent  the  results  of  the  Government’s  best  effort  to  ascertain 
these  facts.  Where  federal  department  officials  have  found 
it  possible  at  a  later  date  to  amend  the  estimates  originally  made, 
revisions  have  been  substituted  for  the  original  figures,  so  that 
the  statistics  given  represent  the  best  available  information  in 


Agricultural  Graphics 


13 


these  matters.  The  federal  government  has  had  in  mind  for 
some  time  further  revision  of  some  of  the  earlier  estimates  of 
acreage  (and  of  production,  as  a  consequence),  but  so  far  this 
work  has  not  been  consummated.  A  committee  of  statistical 
experts,  composed  of  Carroll  W.  Doten  of  the  Boston  Institute 
of  Technology,  Prof.  Warren  M.  Persons  of  Harvard,  W.  I. 
King  of  the  Bureau  of  Business  Research  of  New  York,  and 
Dr.  G.  F.  Warren,  of  Cornell  University,  has  examined  very  re¬ 
cently  the  statistical  work  of  the  U.  S.  Department  of  Agricul¬ 
ture  and  recommended  the  revision  and  publication  for  all  states 
of  such  historical  records  of  acreage,  production,  and  livestock 
as  we  are  giving  here  for  North  Carolina.  As  a  matter  of  fact, 
however,  it  is  not  always  possible  for  the  Government  to  carry 
out  promptly  recommendations  of  this  kind,  though  eventually 
they  may  be  acted  upon.  This  fact  has  been  borne  in  mind  in 
the  preparation  of  the  present  bulletin,  and  accordingly  only  such 
charts  and  graphs  have  been  presented  as  will  be  affected  very 
little,  if  at  all,  by  any  future  revisions  of  acreage,  production, 
or  livestock  figures.  Estimates  of  yield  per  acre,  of  farm  price 
per  unit,  and  the  resultant  figure — value  per  acre,  will  remain 
practically  unchanged  in  spite  of  revisions  of  individual  acreage 
figures  in  some  years. 

The  failings  inherent  in  estimates  of  acreage  and  production 
have  furnished  an  additional  reason  for  basing  our  graphs  on 
per-acre  and  per-unit  figures  rather  than  on  totals.  The  per-acre 
and  per-unit  figures  are  not  subject  to  the  cumulative  error 
which  is  apt  to  be  present  in  the  estimates  of  acreage  and  pro¬ 
duction ;  and,  furthermore,  they  are  rendered  more  reliable  by 
the  unerring  nature  of  the  law  of  averages.  That  is  to  say, 
they  are  based  on  a  very  large  number  of  estimates,  similarly 
made  from  year  to  year  and  properly  distributed  so  as  to  con¬ 
stitute  them  reliable  samples.  For  this  reason,  considerable  re¬ 
liance  may  be  placed  upon  them. 

Examining  the  charts  presented,  it  may  be  noted  that  in 
every  crop  shown  there  is  a  marked  trend  towards  increased 
yield  per  acre  in  the  United  States;  and  this  is  true  also  in  North 
Carolina  for  all  crops  with  the  exception  of  hay  and  Irish  pota¬ 
toes.  Both  these  crops  are  at  present  on  the  upward  path  in 


TABLE  II— CORN 


Year 

NORTH  CAROLINA 

UNITED  STATES 

Acr’ge  Harv’t’d 
1000  Acres 

Av.  Yield  per 
Acre — Bus. 

Production 

1000  Bus. 

Av.  Farm  Price 

bu.  Dec.  1 — Cts. 

Farm  V  alue 

December  1 

1000  Dolls. 

v  ai.  Acre  .oasis 

Dec.  1  Farm 

Price — Dolls. 

Acr’ge  Harv’t’d 

1000  Acres 

Av.  Yield  per 

Acre — Bus. 

Production 

1000  Bus. 

Av.  Farm  Price 

bu.  Dec.  1 — Cts. 

Farm  Val.Dec.l 

1000  Dolls. 

Val.  Acre  Basis 

Dec.  1  Farm 

Price — Dolls. 

1866 _ 

1,805 

12.0 

21,657 

78 

16,867 

9.36 

34,307 

25.3 

867,946 

47.4 

411,451 

11.99 

1867— 

1,549 

11.6 

17,974 

74 

13,390 

8.58 

32,520 

23.6 

768,320 

57.0 

437,770 

13.46 

1868— 

1,634 

14.3 

23,366 

58 

13,561 

8.29 

34,887 

26.0 

906,527 

46.8 

424,057 

12.16 

1869— 

1,176 

14.8 

17,400 

79 

13,788 

11.69 

37,103 

23.6 

874,320 

59.8 

522,551 

14.08 

1869  .. 

18,454 

7 60,945 

1S70 _ 

1,541 

14.6 

22,500 

70 

15,754 

10.22 

38,647 

2S.3 

1,094,255 

49.4 

540,520 

13.99 

1871— 

1,479 

14.0 

20,700 

64 

13,217 

8.96 

34,091 

29.1 

991,898 

43.4 

430,356 

12.62 

1872_. . 

1,501 

16.0 

24,012 

55 

13,186 

8.80 

35,527 

30.8 

1,092,719 

35.3 

385,736 

10.86 

1873-- 

1,488 

14.2 

21,130 

59 

12,452 

8.38 

39,197 

23.8 

932,274 

44.2 

411,961 

10.51 

1874 _ 

1,353 

16.4 

22,186 

65 

14,404 

10.66 

41,037 

20.7 

850,148 

58.4 

496,271 

12.09 

1875 _ 

1,485 

15.0 

22,275 

52 

11,652 

7.80 

44,841 

29.5 

1,321,069 

36.7 

484,675 

10.81 

1876 _ 

1,575 

14.6 

23,000 

49 

11,384 

7.15 

49,033 

26.2 

1,283,828 

34.0 

436,109 

8.89 

1877 _ 

1,629 

14.0 

22,800 

51 

11,533 

7.14 

50,369 

26.7 

1,342,558 

34.8 

467,635 

9.28 

1878— 

1,662 

13.6 

22,603 

45 

10,151 

6.12 

51,585 

26.9 

1,388,219 

31.7 

440,281 

8.54 

1879 _ 

2,305 

15.0 

34,575 

58 

20,054 

8.70 

62,369 

29.2 

1,823,163 

37.1 

676,251 

10.84 

1879— 

2,305 

12.2 

28,020 

62  369 

28.1 

1,754,592 

1S80 _ 

2,253 

16.4 

36,954 

52 

19,216 

8.53 

62,31S 

27.6 

1,717,435 

39.6 

679,714 

10.91 

1881  — 

2,30S 

11.7 

26,977 

79 

21,312 

9.24 

64,262 

18.0 

1,194,916 

63.6 

759,482 

11.82 

1882— 

2,446 

14.0 

34.261 

53 

18,158 

7.42 

65,660 

24.6 

1,617,025 

48.5 

783,867 

11.94 

1883 _ 

2,495 

11.5 

28,692 

65 

18,650 

7.48 

68,302 

22.7 

1,551,067 

42.4 

658,051 

9.63 

1884 _ 

2,520 

12.5 

31,499 

60 

18,899 

7.50 

69,684 

25.8 

1,795,528 

35.7 

640,736 

9.19 

1885— 

2,545 

9.9 

25,199 

55 

13,859 

5.44 

73,130 

26.5 

1,936,176 

32.8 

635,675 

8.69 

1886 _ 

2,596 

10.5 

27,215 

57 

15,513 

5.9S 

75,694 

22.0 

1,665,441 

36.6 

610,311 

8.06 

1887— 

2,674 

13.4 

35,830 

59 

21,140 

7.91 

72,393 

20.1 

1,456,161 

44.4 

646,107 

8.93 

1888— 

2,674 

10.6 

28,343 

58 

16,439 

6.15 

75,673 

26.3 

1,987,790 

34.1 

677,562 

8.95 

1889 _ 

2,361 

12.0 

28,332 

53 

15,016 

6.36 

72,088 

27.7 

1,998,648 

27.4 

546,984 

7.59 

1889 

2,361 

10.9 

25,784 

72,088 

29.4 

2,122,328 

1890— 

2,320 

13.3 

30,856 

55 

16,971 

7.32 

70,390 

20.7 

1,460,406 

50.0 

729,647 

10.37 

1891 _ 

2,280 

14.1 

32,148 

58 

18,646 

8.18 

74,496 

27.6 

2,055,823 

39.7 

816,917 

10.97 

1892 _ 

2,200 

10.2 

22,440 

54 

12,118 

5.51 

72,610 

23.6 

1,713,688 

38.8 

664,390' 

9.15 

1893 _ 

2,200 

12.3 

27,060 

50 

13.530 

6.15 

74,434 

22.9 

1,707,572 

35.9 

612,998 

8.24 

1894 _ 

2,300 

13.4 

30,820 

47 

14,485 

6.30 

69,396 

19.3 

1,339,680 

45.1 

604,523 

8.71 

1895 _ 

2,450 

14.5 

35,525 

38 

13,500 

5.51 

85,567 

27.0 

2,310,952 

25.0 

578,408 

6.76 

1896 _ 

2,470 

12.0 

29,640 

37 

10,967 

4.44 

86,560 

28.9 

2,503,484 

21.3 

532,884 

6.16 

1897 _ 

2,450 

13.0 

31,850 

43 

13,696 

5.59 

88,127 

24.3 

2,144,553 

26.0 

558,309 

6.34 

1898— 

2,5S0 

14.0 

36,120 

43 

15,532 

6.02 

88,304 

25.6 

2,261,119 

28.4 

642,747 

7.28 

1899 _ 

2,720 

13.0 

35,360 

47 

16,619 

6.11 

94.914 

25.9 

2,454,626 

29.9 

734,917 

7.74 

1899 ... 

2,720 

12.8 

34,819 

94,914 

28.1 

2,666,324 

1900 _ 

2,675 

12.0 

32,100 

57 

18,297 

6.84 

95,042 

26.4 

2,505,148 

35.1 

878,243 

9.24 

1901 _ 

2,575 

12.0 

30,900 

73 

22,557 

8.76 

94,636 

17.0 

1,607,288 

60.0 

964,543 

10.19 

1902— 

2,700 

13.9 

37,530 

60 

22,518 

8.34 

95,517 

27.4 

2,620,699 

40.0 

1,048,735 

10.98 

1903 _ 

2,570 

14.7 

37,779 

61 

23,045 

8.97 

90,661 

25.8 

2,339,417 

42.1 

984,173 

10.86 

1904.— 

2,550 

15.2 

38,760 

62 

24,031 

9.42 

93,340 

27.0 

2,520,682 

43.7 

1,101,430 

11.80 

1905 _ 

2,500 

13.9 

34,750 

64 

22,240 

8.90 

93,573 

29.3 

2,744,329 

40.7 

1,116,817 

11.94 

1906 _ 

2,500 

15,3 

38,250 

68 

26,010 

10.40 

93,643 

30.9 

2,895,822 

39.2 

1,135,969 

12.13 

1907— 

2,500 

16.5 

41,250 

74 

30,525 

12.21 

94,971 

26.5 

2,512,065 

50.9 

1,277,607 

13.45 

1908 _ 

2,450 

18.0 

44,100 

79 

34,839 

14.22 

95,603 

26.6 

2,544,957 

60.0 

1,527,679 

15.98 

1909... 

2,459 

16.8 

41,311 

85 

35,114 

14.28 

98,383 

26.1 

2,572,336 

58.6 

1,507,185 

15.32 

1909— 

2,459 

13.8 

34,064 

98,383 

25.9 

2,552,190 

1910 _ 

2,650 

18.6 

49,290 

76 

37,460 

14.14 

1.04,035 

27.7 

2,886,260 

48.0 

1,384,817 

13.31 

1911... 

2,700 

18.4 

49,680 

82 

40,738 

15.09 

105,825 

23.9 

2,531,488 

61.8 

1,565,258 

14.79 

1912— 

2,808 

18.2 

51,106 

83 

42,418 

15.11 

L07,083 

29.2 

3,124,746 

48.7 

1,520,454 

14.20 

1913 _ 

2,835 

19.5 

55,282 

88 

48,648 

17.16 

105,820 

23.1 

2,446,988 

69.1 

1,692,092 

15.99 

1914— 

2,835 

20.3 

57,550 

86 

49,493 

17.46 

L03,435 

25.8 

2,672,804 

64.4 

1,722,070 

16.65 

1915 _ 

2,900 

21.0 

60,900 

77 

46,893 

16.17 

106,197 

28.2 

2,994,793 

57.5 

1,722,680 

16.22 

1916 _ 

2,600- 

18.5 

48,100 

110 

52,910 

20.35 

L05.296 

24.4 

2,566,927 

88.9 

2,280,729 

21.66 

1917— 

2,920 

20.0 

58,400 

170 

90,280 

34.00 

116,730 

26.3 

3,065,233 

127.9 

3,920,228 

33.58 

1918 _ 

3,030 

21.0 

63,630 

177 

112,625 

37.17 

104,467 

24.0 

2,502,665 

136.5 

3,416,240 

32.70 

1919* _ 

2,531 

19.0 

48,0S9 

185 

88,965 

35.15 

97,170 

28.9 

2,811,302 

134.5 

3,780,597 

38.91 

1919 ... 

2,311 

17.7 

40,998 

87,772 

26.7 

2,345,833 

1920 _ 

2,428 

22.5 

54,630 

113 

61,732 

25.42 

1.01,699 

31.5 

3,208,584 

67.0 

2,150,332 

21.14 

1921 _ 

2,552 

19.3 

49,254 

78 

38,418 

15.05 

103,740 

29.6 

3,068,569 

42.3 

1,297,213 

12.50 

1922**. 

2,526 

20.0 

50,520 

89 

44,963 

17.80 

102,428 

28.2 

2,890,712 

65.7 

1,900,287 

18.55 

*  Revisions  based  on  1919  census.  **  Subject  to  revision  December,  1923. 


Agricultural  Graphics 


15 


^  aj  o  n  4  o  co 

5r-\  t—  t—  fr—  t'- 

5  ®  ®  CD  tfl  CO  CO 


^  3?  o  o  cs»  «±  <£>  _  e> 

QOaoCQ<35<no“*^a-><r»ooo 
_  —  ^  _  59  5^  SE?  ao  o^cngr^otDO^cncna^cp-^  *r> 


oj^<^Ocooes»^vO 


185 


165 


Corn 

Farm  price  Dec  1,  yearly.  N.C. 

•  •■  -  10-year  average  ending  fn  years  indicated!# 

.  -  -  -.  -  US 

i 

i 

i 

- 

J 

r 

< 

/ 

i 

i 

i 

1 

/ 

i 

»  / 
A  i 

\ 

,\ 

,1 

/ 

A 

/  \ 

'  \ 

A" 

/ 

\  y 
■A 

/ 

7 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

1  \ 

1 

1 

fr 

1  \ 
Li 

t 

M 

1  \ 

/ 

r# 

/ 

/ 

\ 

1 

1 

\ 

V 

/ 

/ 

/ 

/ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

A 

/ 

-V-S 

I 

1 

 / 

a 

y 

\ 

/  ^ 

1 

/ 

V* 

\ 

id&f 

/ 

/ 

/*■" 

..—  - 

p 

*"'v 

C/5 

?46/ 

... 

V 

V 

-V.- 

X" 

/ 

185 


1&5 


145 


125 


105 


85 


65 


45 


25 


145 


125 

-J 

Ui 

X 

Q 

^105 

ui 

a. 

Vi 

h- 
Z 

Ui 

c_> 


65 


65 


45 


-M 


CHART  15.— CORN:  FARM  PRICE,  N.  C.  AND  U.  S. 


CENTS  PE.fi  BuSHEL  Bu3mEL3  PER  ACRE 


CHART  16. — CORN:  VALUE  PER  ACRE,  N.  C.  AND 


16 


Agricultural  Graphics 


d 

CQ 


Dollars  per  Acre 


Dollars  per  Acre 


Agricultural  Graphics 


17 


yield  per  acre  in  North  Carolina,  but  they  have  not  yet  reached 
their  earlier  level. 

Looking  at  the  charts  in  detail,  we  may  observe  a  number  of 
interesting  points. 

Corn.  The  enormous  difference  between  our  yield  per  acre 
of  corn  and  the  yield  in  the  United  States  as  a  whole  is  striking¬ 
ly  shown  in  chart  14.  But  it  is  also  shown  that  we  have  made  a 
much  greater  gain  in  yield  per  acre  than  the  country  as  a  whole 
has  made,  and  the  gulf  fixed  between  our  average  yield  and  the 
United  States  average  seems  to  be  steadily  decreasing.  The 
United  States  average  yield  per  acre  for  the  ten-year  period 
1913-22  was  27.00  bushels,  as  compared  with  26.07  bushels  for 
the  decade  1886-75 — a  gain  of  3.6  percent;  whereas  in  North 
Carolina  the  yield  in  the  later  period  was  20.11  bushels  per  acre 
and  in  the  earier  period  14.29  bushels — a  gain  of  40.7  percent. 

As  a  consequence  of  the  smallness  of  our  yield,  our  farm 
price  per  bushel  has  been  consistently  higher  than  the  United 
States  average  (chart  15)  ;  and  though  our  yield  has  been  in¬ 
creasing,  our  farm  price  per  bushel  has  also  maintained  an  up¬ 
ward  trend.  The  result  is  that  our  value  per  acre,  after  being 
for  a  long  period  below  the  United  States  average,  has  in  recent 
years  risen  above  the  United  States  average  value  per  acre. 
This  is  shown  in  chart  16.  This  achievement  is  the  result  of 
our  increased  yield  per  acre  rather  than  of  our  increased  price  per 
bushel.  There  is  very  litttle  difference  in  the  percentage  of  in¬ 
crease  in  price  per  bushel  of  corn  in  North  Carolina  and  the 
United  States,  as  is  shown  by  the  fact  that  the  percentage  gain  in 
price  per  bushel,  comparing  the  ten-year  average  for  1913-22  with 
the  ten-year  average  f  or  1866-75,  was  79.4  in  North  Carolina  and 
78.5  in  the  United  States.  But  at  the  same  time,  because  of  our 
increased  yield,  comparing  the  two  decades  1913-22  and  1866-75, 
the  North  Carolina  increase  in  value  per  acre  is  shown  to  be 
154.2  percent,  while  the  United  States  gain  was  only  8.95  percent. 

Wheat.  Our  wheat  crop  comprises  only  a  very  small  pro¬ 
portion — seven-tenths  of  one  percent — of  the  total  United  States 
wheat  crop.  However,  as  in  the  corn  crop — though  not  to  so 
great  an  extent — we  seem  to  be  gaining  on  the  United  States  in 
the  percentage  increase  in  yield  per  acre  (chart  17).  Compar¬ 
ing  the  per-acre  yields  in  the  two  decades  1913-22  and  1866-75 


TABLE  III— WHEAT 


Year 

NORTH  CAROLINA 

UNITED  STATES 

Acr’ge  Harv’t’d 
1000  Acres 

Av.  Yield  per 
Acre — Bus. 

Production 

1000  Bus. 

Av.  Farm  Price 

bu.  Dec.  1 — Cts. 

Farm  Val.Dec.l 

1000  Dolls. 

Val.  Acre  Basis 

Dec.  1  Farm 

Price — Dolls. 

Acr’ge  Harv’t’d 

1000  Acres 

Av.  Yield  per 

Acre — Bus. 

Production 

1000  Bus. 

Av.  Farm  Price 

bu.  Dec.  1 — Cts. 

Farm  Val.Dec.l 

1000  Dolls. 

Val.  Acre  Basis 

Dec.  1  Farm 

Price — Dolls. 

1866 _ 

491 

5.8 

2,846 

189 

5,384 

10.96 

15,424 

9.9 

152,000 

152.7 

232,110 

15.05 

1867.-- 

495 

6.9 

3,415 

151 

5,162 

10.42 

18,322 

11.6 

212,441 

145.2 

308,387 

16.83 

1868— 

504 

5.9 

2,971 

149 

4,421 

8.79 

18,460 

12.1 

224,037 

108.5 

243,033 

13.17 

1869— 

461 

8.4 

3,870 

121 

4,692 

10.16 

19,181 

13.6 

260,147 

76.5 

199,025 

10.38 

1869 

2,860 

287,746 

1870... 

490 

8.6 

4,218 

109 

4,581 

9.37 

18,993 

12.4 

235, S85 

94.4 

222,767 

11.73 

1871 — 

422 

6.0 

2,530 

128 

3,231 

7.68 

19,944 

11.6 

230,722 

114.5 

264,076 

13.24 

1872 _ 

401 

8.2 

3,289 

136 

4,457 

11.15 

20,S58 

12.0 

249,997 

111.4 

278,522 

13.35 

1873 _ 

451 

6.2 

2,795 

143 

3,989 

8.87 

22,172 

12.7 

281,255 

106.9 

300,670 

13.56 

1874 _ 

360 

8.0 

2,878 

124 

3,581 

9.92 

24,967 

12.3 

308,103 

86.3 

265,881 

10.65 

1875— 

407 

7.5 

3,050 

108 

3,297 

S.10 

26,382 

11.1 

292,136 

89.5 

261,397 

9.91 

1876 _ 

411 

7.3 

3,000 

110 

3,300 

8.03 

27,627 

10.5 

289,356 

97.0 

280,743 

10.16 

1877— 

470 

8.3 

3,900 

106 

4,135 

8.80 

26,278 

13.9 

364,194 

105.7 

385,089 

14.65 

1878 _ 

465 

6.5 

3,024 

100 

3,018 

6.50 

32,109 

13.1 

420,122 

77.6 

325,814 

10.15 

1879— 

647 

7.0 

4,529 

128 

5,797 

8.96 

35,430 

14.1 

496,435 

110.6 

549,219 

15.50 

7879— 

6k  1 

5.3 

3,39  7 

35,430 

13.0 

459,483 

1880. _ 

761 

6.4 

4,871 

115 

5,602 

7.36 

37,987 

13.1 

498, 550!  95.1 

474,202 

12.48 

1881— 

662 

6.9 

4,579 

149 

6,823 

10.28 

37,709 

10.2 

383,280  119.2 

456,880 

12.12 

1882 _ 

710 

7.7 

5,495 

106 

5,824 

8.16 

37,067 

13.6 

504,185 

88.4 

445,602 

12.02 

1883 _ 

717 

5.9 

4,231 

117 

4,950 

6.90 

36,456 

11.6 

421,086 

91.1 

383,649 

10.52 

1884 _ 

767 

6.1 

4,650 

89 

4,138 

5.43 

39,476 

13.0 

512,765 

64.5 

330,862 

8.38 

1885— 

683 

4.1 

2,790 

100 

2,790 

4.10 

34,189 

10.4 

357,112 

77.1 

275,320 

8.05 

1886— 

697 

4.6 

3,209 

100 

3,209 

4.60 

36,806 

12.4 

457,218 

68.7 

314,226 

8.54 

1887 _ 

717 

7.1 

5,094 

88 

4,483 

6.25 

37,642 

12.1 

456,329 

68.1 

310,613 

8.25 

1888— 

710 

5.4 

3,835 

105 

4,027 

5.67 

37,336 

11.1 

415,868 

92.6 

385,248 

10.32 

1889 _ 

666 

6.2 

4,129 

90 

3,716 

5.58 

33,580 

12.9 

434,383 

69.5 

301,869 

8.99 

1889 _ 

666 

6.4 

4,292 

33,580 

13.9 

468,374 

1890 _ 

700 

4.4 

3,080 

100 

3,080 

4.40 

34,048 

11.1 

378,097 

83.3 

315,112 

9.25 

1891 _ 

720 

6.8 

4,896 

102 

4,994 

6.94 

37,826 

15.5 

584,504 

83.4 

487,463 

12.89 

1892— 

740 

7.1 

5,254 

89 

4,676 

6.32 

39,552 

13.3 

527,986 

62.2 

328,329 

8.30 

1893— 

760 

8.2 

6,232 

72 

4,487 

5.90 

37,934 

11.3 

427,553 

53.5 

228,599 

6.03 

1894 _ 

760 

5.0 

3,800 

65 

2,470 

3.25 

39,425 

13.1 

516,485 

48.9 

252,709 

6.41 

1895 _ 

7S0 

6.9 

5,382 

72 

3,875 

4.97 

40,848 

13.9 

569,456 

50.3 

286,539 

7.01 

1896 _ 

770 

7.3 

5,621 

83 

4,665 

6.06 

43,916 

12.4 

544,193 

71.7 

390,346 

8.89 

1897 _ 

700 

8.0 

5,600 

94 

5,264 

7.52 

46,046 

13.3 

610,254 

80.9 

493,683 

10.72 

1898 _ 

760 

9.2 

6,992 

78 

5,454 

7.18 

51,007 

15.1 

772,163 

58.2 

449,022 

8.80 

1899 _ 

747 

6.7 

5,005 

82 

4,104 

5.49 

52,589 

12.1 

636,051 

58.6 

372,982 

7.09 

1899 _ 

747 

5.8 

4,342 

52,589 

12.5 

658,534 

1900 _ 

830 

9.6 

7,968 

82 

6,534 

7.87 

51,387 

11.7 

602,708 

62.0 

373,578 

7.27 

1901 _ 

820 

8.7 

7,134 

82 

5.850 

7.13 

52,473 

15.0 

789,538 

62.6 

494,096 

9.42 

1902 ___ 

640 

5.3 

3,392 

92 

3,121 

4.88 

49,649 

14.6 

724,528 

63.0 

456,530 

9.20 

1903 _ 

680 

5.1 

3,468 

97 

3,364 

4.95 

51,632 

12.9 

664,543 

69.5 

461,605 

8.94 

1904— 

600 

8.6 

5,160 

119 

6,140 

10.23 

47,S25 

12.5 

596,375 

92.4 

551,128 

11.52 

1905 _ 

600 

6.7 

4,020 

102 

4,100 

6.83 

49,389 

14.7 

726, 3S4 

74.6 

542,119 

10.98 

1906 _ 

560 

9.1 

5,096 

93 

4,739 

8.46 

47,800 

15.8 

757,195 

66.2 

501,355 

10.49 

1907— 

520 

9.5 

4,940 

107 

5,286 

10.16 

45,113 

14.1 

637,981 

86.5 

552,074 

12.24 

1908— 

500 

10.0 

5,000 

107 

5,350 

10.70 

45,970 

14.0 

644,656 

92.2 

594,092 

12.92 

1909 _ 

502 

9.5 

4,769 

127 

6,057 

12.06 

44,262 

15.8 

700,434 

98.4 

689,108 

15.57 

1909 _ 

502 

7.6 

3,827 

44,262 

15.4 

683,379 

1910 _ 

598 

11.4 

6,817 

110 

7,499 

12.54 

45,6S1 

13.9 

635,121 

88.3 

561,051 

12.28 

1911 _ 

626 

10.6 

6,636 

102 

6,769 

10.81 

49,543 

12.5 

621,338 

87.4 

543,063 

10.96 

1912 _ 

598 

8.9 

5,322 

111 

5,907 

9.88 

45,814 

15.9 

730,267 

76.0 

555,280 

12.12 

1913— 

605 

11.7 

7,078 

106 

7,503 

12.40 

50,184 

15.2 

763,380 

79.9 

610,122 

12.16 

1914— 

611 

12.0 

7,332 

117 

8,578 

14.04 

53,541 

16.6 

891,017 

98.6 

878,680 

16.41 

1915 _ 

900 

10.9 

9,810 

120 

11,772 

13.08 

60,469 

17.0 

1,025,801 

91.9 

942,303 

15.58 

1916— 

870 

10.5 

9,135 

176 

16,078 

18.48 

52,316 

12.2 

636,318 

160.3 

1,019,968 

19.50 

1917 _ 

860 

10.0 

8,600 

234 

20,124 

23.40 

45,089 

14.1 

636,655 

200.8 

1,278,112 

28.35 

1918 _ 

900 

7.0 

6,300 

230 

14,490 

16.10 

59,181 

15.6 

921,438 

204.2 

1,881,826 

31.80 

1919* _ 

705 

7.9 

5,570 

233 

12,978 

18.41 

75,694 

12.8 

967,979 

214.9 

2j0S0,056 

27.48 

1919 — 

621 

7.6 

4,7 45 

73,099 

12.9 

945,403 

1920 _ 

680 

11.7 

7,956 

210 

16,708 

24.57 

61,143 

13.6 

833,027 

143.7 

1,197,263 

19.58 

1921 _ 

600 

7.5 

4,500 

144 

6,480 

10.80 

63,696 

12.8 

814,905 

92.6 

754,834 

11.85 

1922**. 

612 

9.0 

5,508 

136 

7,491 

12.24 

61,230 

14.0 

856,211 

100.9 

864,139 

14.11 

Revisions  based  on  1919  census.  **  Subject  to  revision  December,  1923. 


Agricultural  Graphics 


19 


•0  ?4  S® 


1  '  '  1  1  1  I  1  1  1 - 1 - 1 - 1 - 3 - 1 - 

IVHtAT 

.  Yearly  yield  per  acre.N.C. 

10-year  averages  ending  i n years  indicated,  N  C 

— ... 

- 1 - 1 - 

- 

■■ 

— i — i 

*• 

U.  5. 

ui. 

— 

r^- 

/ 

f' 

\ 

i 

i 

\ 

rs 

! 

; 

V 

\ 

\ 

; 

i 

V 

-A- 

j 

\  j 

/ 

- 

! 

T7 

i 

\  / 
\  j 

\  ; 

/  \ 

/• 

•  \ 

/ 

\  i 

v> 

1 

\  A 

\  ! 

/ 

if 

A 

/  \ 

\  j 

V 

' 

\ 

\ 

A 

r 

\ 

1 

: 

\ 

/  ! 

*, 

\ 

1 

i 

i 

\ 

16 

15 

14 

13 

12 

il  <j 

(E 

O 

10  < 
<r 
ui 

9 

.3 


1  (0 


5 

“•  9 

3 


ff)  7 

6 

5 

4 


CHART  17. — WHEAT:  YIELD  PER  ACRE,  N.  C.  AND  U.  S. 


I  I  ! 


^  S P  5?  8  8 

o  cd  cr>  «»  cA 


«£>  O  r»a 

ra  c j 

Co  co  CO 


s  § 


233 

Z\b 

HOC 

is: 

jI7 0 


■ 

WHEAT 

1  '  i  i  l  l  i  '  i  i  '  i  i  i  1  i  i  r  '  r~  r 

arm  price  Dec  1.  Yeorly,  N  C 

••  -  -  10-yecr  average  ending  in  years  indicated.  N.C. 

\ 

* 

" 

* 

•• 

* 

- 

- 

US 

\ 

\ 

/' 

V 

< 

■A, 

4 

J 

/ 

ui 

n 

iv 

• 

A 

;  \ 

\ 

-K- 

j  \ 

j  \ 

~T 

/ 

/ 

\ 

j 

\ 

\ 

"An. 

4,  <r 

/ 

\ 

/  \ 

/  > 

-v 

V 

i" 

V 

s 

*v 

o: 

\ 

r— 

/ 

s 

w 

y 

\ 

y.. 

> 

V 

y 

'v 

\ 

,A 

/ 

_ 

/ 

V 

\ 

/ 

** 

_ _ 

245 

250 

215 

200 
W5 
170 
155  V 

D 

I+0CQ 

c 

□ 

125  «- 
n 
no  £ 

u 

95° 

60 

65 

50 


:  155 


to 

M0 

c 

UI 

t  125 
•n 

r  no 

wi 

U) 


CHART  18.— WHEAT:  FARM  PRICE,  N.  C.  AND  U.  S. 


4 


20 


Agricultural  Graphics 


shows  the  percentage  increase  in  North  Carolina  to  be  37.3 
and  in  the  United  States  20.6.  Of  course  in  both  the  United 
States  and  North  Carolina  there  has  been  a  decline  in  yield  since 
the  high-pressure  days  of  the  war  years,  but  in  North  Carolina 
the  trend  is  again  upwards,  though  there  would  seem  to  be  a  con¬ 
tinuous  decline  for  the  country  as  a  whole. 

In  farm  price  per  bushel  of  wheat  (chart  18)  we  run  rather 
uniformly  parallel  with  the  United  States  except  that  in  the  war 
years  the  United  States  price  gained  on  ours  and  since  the  war 
we  seem  to  have  had  the  advantage.  Our  price  is  uniformly 
higher  than  the  United  States  price,  but  on  the  whole  the  United 
States  has  made  a  slightly  greater  gain  in  average  price.  The 
percentage  gain  of  the  latest  decade,  1913-22,  over  the  earliest, 
1866-75,  was  25.6  in  North  Carolina  and  27.8  in  the  United 
States. 

There  is  not  sufficient  difference  between  price  per  bushel 
of  wheat  in  North  Carolina  and  in  the  United  States  to  over¬ 
come  the  difference  in  yield  per  acre ;  consequently  our  value 
per  acre  (chart  19)  is  uniformly  lower  than  the  value  per  acre 
in  the  United  States.  We  gained  decidedly  on  the  United  States 
average  up  to  1916,  but  have  failed  to  keep  pace  with  the  United 
States  since  that  date.  The  percentage  gain  for  the  decade 
1913-22  over  the  decade  1866-75  was  71.4  in  North  Carolina  and 
53.9  in  the  United  States. 

Oats.  Our  oats  crop  is  so  insignificant  as  hardly  to  call  for 
detailed  consideration.  It  represents  three-tenths  of  one  percent 
of  the  total  oats  crop  of  the  United  States,  and  contributes  eight- 
tenths  of  one  percent  to  our  state  aggregate  crop  values.  As 
with  corn  and  wheat,  the  yield  per  acre  (chart  20)  in  the  United 
States  as  a  whole  is  greatly  larger  than  in  North  Carolina,  but 
we  show  a  greater  percentage  gain  than  the  United  States  shows 
when  the  averages  for  the  earliest  and  latest  decades  considered 
are  compared  (35.9  percent  gain  in  North  Carolina  and  11.7  per¬ 
cent  in  the  United  States  at  large).  As  with  corn,  our  higher 
farm  price  (chart  21)  has  brought  up  our  value  per  acre  (chart 
22)  nearer  to  the  United  States  level.  The  gain  in  value  per  acre 
in  the  average  for  the  decade  1913-22  over  the  average  for  1866-75 
was  101.2  percent  in  North  Carolina  and  49.6  percent  in  the 
United  States. 


TABLE  IV— OATS 


Year 

NORTH  CAROLINA 

UNITED  STATES 

Acr’ge  Harv’t’d 
1000  Acres 

Av.  Yield  per 
Acre — Bus. 

Production 

1000  Bus. 

Av.  Farm  Price 

bu.  Dec.  1 — Cts. 

Farm  Val.Dec.l 

1000  Dolls. 

Val.  Acre  Basis 

Dec.  1  Farm 

Price — Dolls.  | 

Acr’ge  Harv’t’d 

1000  Acres 

Av.  Yield  per 
Acre — Bus. 

- - 

Production 

1000  Bus. 

Av.  Farm  Price 

bu.  Dec.  1 — Ots. 

Farm  Val.Dec.l 

1000  Dolls. 

Val.  Acre  Basis 

Dec.  1  Farm 
Price — Dolls. 

1866 _ 

206 

14.3 

2,949 

49 

1,455 

7.01 

8,864 

1  30.2 

268,141 

35.1 

94,058 

10.61 

1867— 

262 

13.3 

3,479 

46 

1,595 

6.12 

10,082  27.6 

278,698 

44.5 

123,903 

12.29 

1868 _ 

268 

13.0 

3,479 

48 

1,683 

6.24 

9,666 

26.4 

254,961 

41.7 

106,356 

11.00 

l86y _ 

232 

15.1 

3,500 

52 

1,803 

7.85 

9,461 

30.5 

28S.334 

38.0 

109,522 

11.58 

1869... 

3,220 

282  107 

1S70 _ 

170 

16.2 

2,750 

51 

1,407 

8.26 

8,792 

28.1 

247,277 

39.0 

96,444 

10.97 

1871— 

208 

10.6 

2,200 

57 

1,246 

6.04 

8,366 

30.6 

255,743 

36.2 

92,591 

11.07 

1872— 

207 

13.8 

2,860 

71 

2,027 

9.80 

9,001 

30.2 

271,747 

29.9 

81,304 

9.03 

1873— 

193 

16.3 

3,146 

52 

1,622 

8.48 

9,752 

27.7 

270,340 

34.6 

93,474 

9.59 

1874 _ 

239 

12.9 

3,083 

60 

1,835 

7.74 

10,897 

22.1 

240,369 

47.1 

113,134 

10.38 

1875 _ 

250 

13.0 

3,250 

51 

1,643 

6.63 

11,915 

29.7 

354,318 

32.0 

113,441 

9.52 

1876 _ 

261 

13.5 

3,530 

49 

1,747 

6.62 

13,359 

24.0 

320,884 

32.4 

103,845 

7.77 

1877 _ 

257 

15.5 

3,980 

45 

1,781 

6.98 

12,826 

31.7 

406,394 

28.4 

115,546 

9.01 

1878 _ 

278 

16.0 

4,448 

43 

1,909 

6.88 

13,176 

31.4 

413,579 

24.6 

101,752 

7.72 

187  y _ 

500 

16.0 

8,000 

45 

3,600 

7.20 

16,11/5 

27.9 

450,745 

33.3 

150,178 

9.30 

1879... 

500 

7.7 

3,838 

16,11/5 

25.3 

1/07,859 

1880 _ 

501 

11.0 

5,515 

51 

2,813 

5.61 

16,188 

25.8 

417,885 

36.0 

150,244 

9.28 

18S1 _ 

506 

8.1 

4,081 

62 

2,530 

5.02 

16,832 

24.7 

416,481 

46.4 

193,199 

11.48 

1SS2 _ 

582 

9.8 

5,713 

48 

2,742 

4.70 

18,495 

26.4 

488,251 

37.5 

182,978 

9.89 

1883 _ 

594 

8.7 

5,142 

51 

2,622 

4.44 

20,325 

28.1 

571,302 

32.7 

187,040 

9.20 

1884 _ 

618 

7.5 

4,622 

46 

2,126 

3.45 

21,301 

27.4 

583,628 

27.7 

161, 52S 

7.58 

1885 _ 

599 

7.5 

4,483 

50 

2,242 

3.75 

22,784 

27.6 

629,409 

28.5 

179,632 

7.88 

1886— 

635 

9.9 

6,276 

45 

2,824 

4.46 

23,658 

26.4 

624,134 

29.8 

1S6.13S 

7.86 

1887 _ 

654 

13.0 

8,504 

44 

3,742 

5.72 

25,921 

25.4 

659,618 

30.4 

200,700 

7.74 

188S _ 

661 

9.2 

6,078 

46 

2,796 

4.23 

26,998 

26.0 

701,735 

27.8 

195,424 

7.24 

1889... 

51/2 

10.2 

5,52S 

44 

2,432 

4.49 

28,321 

28.3 

801, 5S6 

21.9 

175,801 

6.21 

1889... 

51/2 

8.3 

If, 513 

28,321 

28.6 

809,251 

1890 _ 

540 

9.2 

4,96S 

51 

2,534 

4.69 

28,102 

20.4 

572,665 

41.6 

238,345 

8.48 

1891.— 

425 

9.5 

4,03S 

51 

2,059 

4.84 

27,604 

30.4 

838,876 

30.6 

256,814 

9.30 

1892 _ 

400 

9.7 

3,880 

45 

1,746 

4.36 

28,023 

24.8 

695.267 

31.5 

218,954 

7.81 

1893 _ 

400 

14.1 

5,640 

44 

2,482 

6.20 

2S,452 

23.8 

676,154 

29.1 

196,505 

6.90 

1894 _ 

390 

10.9 

4,251 

44 

1,870 

4.80 

28,362 

25.2 

715,559 

32.1 

229,538 

8.09 

1S95 _ 

370 

15.1 

5,587 

38 

2,123 

5.74 

29,379 

30.2 

885,900 

19.4 

172,186 

5.86 

1896 _ 

340 

12.0 

4,080 

35 

1,428 

4.20 

29,645 

26.3 

780,563 

18.3 

143,192 

4.83 

1S97 _ 

310 

13.0 

4,030 

37 

1,491 

4.81 

28,353 

27.9 

791,591 

20.8 

164,886 

5.82 

1898— 

300 

14.3 

4,290 

37 

1,587 

5.29 

28,769 

29.3 

842,747 

25.2 

212,482 

7.39 

1899 _ 

271 

12.0 

3,252 

41 

1,333 

4.92 

29,51/0 

31.3 

925,555 

24.5 

226, 5SS 

7.67 

1899 _ 

271 

9.1 

2,Jf55 

29,51/0 

31.9 

91/3,389 

1900 _ 

260 

13.9 

3,614 

45 

1,636 

6.26 

30,290 

29.9 

904,566 

25.4 

230,160 

7.60 

1901 _ 

260 

14.4 

3,744 

51 

1,909 

7.34 

29,894 

26.0 

778,531 

40.0 

311,374 

10.42 

1902— 

250 

12.7 

3,175 

51 

1,619 

6.48 

30,578 

34.5 

1,055,441 

30.6 

322,944 

10.56 

1903 _ 

240 

11.4 

2,736 

52 

1,423 

5.93 

30,S66 

27.5 

848,824 

33.8 

286,879 

9.29 

1904 _ 

225 

15.8 

3,555 

52 

1,S49 

8.22 

31,353 

32.1 

1,007,183 

31.0 

312,467 

9.97 

1905 _ 

230 

15.3 

3,519 

47 

1,654 

7.19 

32.072 

33.3 

1,068,780 

28.8 

308,086 

9.61 

1908 _ 

225 

16.2 

3,645 

49 

1,786 

7.94 

33,353 

31.0 

1,034,623 

31.8 

329,142 

9.87 

1907 _ 

220 

15.6 

5,632 

60 

3,379 

9.36 

33,641 

24.0 

807,308 

44.3 

357,340 

10.62 

1908 _ 

230 

16.5 

3,795 

63 

2,391 

10.40 

34,006 

24.9 

847,109 

47.3 

400,363 

11.77 

1909 _ 

228 

16.5 

3,762 

66 

2,483 

10.89 

35,159 

30.4 

1,068,289 

40.6 

433,869 

12.34 

1909... 

228 

12.2 

2,783 

35,159 

28.6 

1,007.11/3 

1910 _ 

221 

18.2 

4,022 

60 

2,413 

10.92 

37,548 

31.6 

1,186,341 

34.4 

408,388 

10.88 

1911 _ 

219 

16.5 

3,614 

63 

2,277 

10.40 

37,763 

24.4 

922, 29S 

45.0 

414,663 

10.98 

1912 _ 

204 

18.6 

3,794 

62 

2,352 

11.53 

37,917 

37.4 

1,418,337 

31.9 

452,469 

11.93 

1913 _ 

230 

19.5 

4,485 

61 

2,736 

11.90 

3S,399 

29.2 

1,121,768 

39.2 

439,596 

11.45 

1914 _ 

250 

17.5 

4,375 

65 

2,844 

11.3S 

38,442 

29.7 

1,141,060 

43.8 

499,431 

12.99 

1915 _ 

350 

23.0 

8,050 

62 

4,991 

14.26 

40,996 

37.8 

1,549,030 

36.1 

559,506 

13.65 

1916 _ 

390 

17.5 

6,825 

74 

5,050 

12.95 

41,527 

30.1 

1,251,837 

52.4 

655,928 

15.80 

1917 _ 

275 

16.0 

4,400 

93 

4,092 

14.88 

43,553 

36.6 

1,592,740 

66.6 

1,061,474 

24.37 

1918 _ 

300 

17.0 

5,100 

108 

5,508 

18.36 

44,349 

34.7 

1,538,124 

70.9 

1,090,322 

24.59 

1919* _ 

170 

16.7 

2,839 

106 

3,009 

17.70 

40,359 

29.3 

1,184,030 

70.4 

833,922 

20.66 

1919 

126 

13.3 

1,671 

37,991 

27.8 

1,055,183 

1920 _ 

154 

22.0 

3,388 

96 

3,252 

21.12 

42,491 

35.2 

1,496,281 

46.0 

688,311 

16.20 

1921 _ 

170 

18.0 

3,060 

70 

2,142 

12.60 

45,495 

23.7 

1,078,341 

30.2 

325,954 

7.16 

1922**. 

178 

21.0 

3,738 

67 

2,504 

14.07 

40,693 

29.9 

1,215,496 

39.4 

478,548 

11.76 

*  Revisions 

based 

on  1919  census. 

*  * 

Subject 

to  revision  December,  192 

3. 

22 


Agricultural  Graphics 


CHART  20.— OATS:  YIELD  PER  ACRE,  N.  C.  AND  U.  S. 


CHART  21.— OATS:  FARM  PRICE,  N.  C.  AND  U.  S. 


Bushels  per  Acre 


Agricultural  Graphics 


23 


58 

CD 


O  «\J  ®  o  ^  ^  5  O  CN) 

t^moncDCDQOo^O^O<r>CT>0  O 
OOQOCO<OCOCDcDCDoO^<J> 


CD  CD  CO  CD  03 


<r>  <r>  cd  <n  tr>  tr»  tr»  ov  <r>  cry 


10 

19 

ta 

17 

16 

15 

14 

13  u 
K 
u 

12  < 
CC 

u 

II  * 

<n 

jo  5 

3  <3 
8 

7 

6 

5 

4 
3 


Potatoes.  Irish  potatoes  are  another  crop  of  which  our  con¬ 
tribution  to  the  food  supply  of  the  country  is  unimportant.  We 
produced  1.2  percent  of  the  total  United  States  crop  in  the  five- 
year  period  1917-21,  and  the  average  value  of  our  crop  in  this 
period  represented  1.5  percent  of  our  average  aggregate  crop 
values.  As  already  noted,  Irish  potatoes  are  a  crop  in  which  our 
present  yields  (chart  23)  in  the  main  are  not  up  to  their  earlier 
levels.  The  trend  was  sharply  downward  in  both  the  United 
States  and  North  Carolina  in  the  decade  from  1880  to  1890,  after 
which  time  the  trend  has  been  on  the  whole  steadily  upward.  Be¬ 
tween  the  earlier  and  later  decades  considered  (1866-75  and 
1913-22),  our  decline  in  average  yields  has  been  1.4  percent, 
whereas  in  this  period  the  United  States  has  advanced  in  yields 
4.6  percent.  Irish  potatoes  are  a  crop  in  which  there  is  a  wide 
variation  in  yield  from  year  to  year  and  correspondingly  large 
variations  in  price  in  opposite  directions  from  the  variations 
in  yield.  In  the  main,  however,  we  have  paralleled  the  United 
States  prices  and  values  per  acre  rather  closely  (charts  24  and 
25),  on  a  higher  level  in  both  instances,  and  there  has  been  a 


TABLE  V— POTATOES,  IRISH 


NORTH  CAROLINA 


UNITED  STATES 


Year 

Acr’ge  Harv’t’d 
1000  Acres 

Av.  Yield  per 
Acre — Bus. 

Production 

1000  Bus. 

Av.  Farm  Price 

bu.  Dec.  1 — Cts. 

Farm  Val.Dec.l 

1000  Dolls. 

Yal.  Acre  Basis 

Dec.  1  Farm 

Price — Dolls. 

Acr’ge  Harv’t’d 

1000  Acres 

Av.  Yield  per 

Acre — Bus. 

Production 

1000  Bus. 

Av.  Farm  Price 

bu.  Dec.  1 — Cts. 

Farm  Val.Dec.l 

1000  Dolls. 

Val.  Acre  Basis 

Dec.  1  Farm 

Price — Dolls. 

1866__. 

10 

81 

831 

49 

409 

39.69 

1,069 

100.2 

107,201 

47.3 

50,723 

47.43 

1867 _ 

9 

93 

838 

44 

372 

40.92 

1,192 

82.0 

97,783 

65.9 

64,462 

54.07 

1868 _ 

11 

76 

838 

66 

555 

50.16 

1,132 

93.8 

106,090 

59.3 

62,919 

55.60 

1869 _ 

9 

74 

675 

63 

428 

46.62 

1,222 

109.5 

133,886 

42.9 

57,481 

47.03 

1869 

739 

143,337 

1870.— 

9 

81 

742 

63 

466 

51.03 

1,325 

86.6 

114,775 

65.0 

74,621 

56.31 

1871— 

8 

105 

816 

64 

521 

67.20 

1,221 

98.7 

120,462 

53.9 

1 64,905 

53.16 

1872 _ 

8 

103 

848 

62 

526 

63.86 

l,33i 

85.3 

113,516 

53.5 

60,692 

45.59 

1873 _ 

8 

94 

780 

64 

496 

60.16 

1,295 

81.9 

106,089 

65.2 

69,154 

53.39 

1874 _ 

9 

75 

702 

62 

437 

46.50 

1,310 

80.9 

105,981 

61.5 

65,223 

49.79 

1875 _ 

9 

85 

745 

58 

435 

49.30 

1,510 

110.5 

166,877 

34.4 

57,358 

37.98 

1876 _ 

12 

70 

850 

59 

499 

41.30 

1,742 

71.7 

124,827 

61.9 

77,320 

44.39 

1877 _ 

12 

72 

853 

76 

647 

54.72 

1,792 

94.9 

170,092 

43.7 

74,272 

41.44 

1878— 

12 

99 

1,197 

59 

705 

58.41 

1,777 

69.9 

124,127 

58.7 

72,924 

41.04 

1879— 

12 

92 

1,104 

63 

696 

57.96 

1,837 

98.9 

181,626 

43.6 

79,154 

43.09 

1879-  . 

7  23 

169,459 

1880 _ 

12 

105 

1,273 

67 

853 

70.35 

1,843 

91.0 

167,660 

48.3 

81,062 

44.00 

1881— 

19 

38 

710 

70 

497 

26.60 

2,042 

53.5 

109,145 

91.0 

99,291 

48.63 

1882 _ 

20 

55 

1,100 

75 

825 

41.70 

2,172 

78.7 

170,973 

55.7 

95,305 

43.S9 

18S3 _ 

20 

65 

1,313 

68 

893 

44.20 

2,289 

90.9 

208,164 

42.2 

87,849 

38.37 

1884— 

20 

63 

1,260 

55 

693 

34.65 

2,221 

85.8 

190,642 

39.6 

75,524 

34.00 

1885— 

21 

61 

1,256 

57 

716 

34.77 

2,266 

77.2 

175,029 

44.7 

78,153 

34.49 

18S6 _ 

21 

60 

1,273 

56 

713 

33.60 

2,287 

73.5 

168,051 

46.7 

78,442 

34.30 

1887 _ 

21 

52 

1,114 

59 

657 

30.68 

2,357 

56.9 

134,103 

68.2 

91,507 

38.82 

1888 _ 

22 

63 

1,377 

65 

895 

40.95 

2,533. 

79.9 

202,365 

40.2 

81,414 

32.14 

1 889 _ 

18 

73 

1,314 

52 

683 

37.96 

2,601 

77.4 

201,200 

35.4 

71,294 

27.41 

1SS9 

18 

51 

1  199 

2,601 

217,546 

1S90 _ 

18 

73 

1,314 

65 

854 

47.45 

2,653 

56.7 

150,494 

75.3 

113,291 

42.70 

1891 _ 

16 

75 

1,200 

68 

816 

51.00 

2,732 

93.7 

256,122 

35.6 

91,229 

33.39 

1S92 _ 

19 

55 

1,045 

61 

637 

33.55 

2,650 

62.1 

164,516 

65.5 

107,835 

40.69 

1893 _ 

20 

97 

1,940 

60 

1,164 

58.20 

2,722 

71.7 

195,040 

58.4 

113,886 

41.84 

1894 _ 

22 

62 

1,364 

60 

818 

37.20 

2,891 

63.6 

183,841 

52.8 

97,030 

33.56 

1895 _ 

22 

79 

1,738 

55 

956 

43.45 

3,101 

102.3 

317,114 

26.2 

83,151 

26.81 

1896 _ 

24 

79 

1,896 

43 

815 

33.97 

2,975 

91.4 

271,769 

29.0 

7S,783 

26.48 

1897 _ 

24 

66 

1,584 

64 

1,014 

42.24 

2,813 

67.9 

191,025 

54.2 

103,442 

36.77 

1898 _ 

24 

67 

1,608 

62 

997 

41.54 

2,841 

77.0 

218,772 

41.5 

90', 897 

31.99 

1899 _ 

24 

57 

1,368 

66 

903 

37.62 

2,939 

88.6 

260,257 

39.7 

103,365 

35.17 

1899 

2J, 

69 

1  636 

2,939 

93.0 

273,318 

1900 _ 

26 

61 

1,5S6 

65 

1,031 

39.65 

2,987 

82.9 

247,759 

42.3 

104,764 

35.07 

1901-  _ 

26 

64 

1,664 

72 

1,198 

46.08 

2,996 

66.3 

19S,626 

76.3 

151,602 

50.60 

1902 _ 

26 

64 

1,664 

67 

1,115 

42.88 

3,078 

95.5 

293,918 

46.9 

137,730 

44.75 

1903-  . 

28 

67 

1.876 

74 

1,388 

49.58 

3,080 

85.1 

262,053 

60.9 

159,620 

51.82 

1904— 

30 

78 

2,340 

70 

1,638 

54.60 

3,172 

111.1 

352,268 

44.8 

157,646 

49.70 

1905- _ 

30 

77 

2,310 

68 

1,571 

52.36 

3,195 

87.3 

278,885 

61.1 

170,340 

53.31 

1906 _ 

32 

75 

2,400 

74 

1,776 

55.50 

3,244 

102.2 

331,685 

50.6 

167,795 

51.72 

1907— 

32 

88 

2,816 

78 

2,196 

68.64 

3,375 

95.7 

322,954 

61.3 

197,863 

58.63 

1908 _ 

32 

79 

2,528 

77 

1,947 

60.83 

3,503 

86.2 

302,000' 

69.7 

210,618 

60.13 

1909- . 

32 

74 

2,368 

81 

1,918 

59.94 

3,669 

107.5 

394,553 

54.2 

213,679 

58.24 

1909 

32 

■  74 

2,372 

3,669 

106.1 

389,195 

1910— 

33 

89 

2,937 

73 

2,144 

64.97 

3,720 

93.8 

349,032 

55.7 

194,566 

52.30 

1911 _ 

31 

48 

1,488 

108 

1,607 

51.84 

3,619 

80.9 

292,737 

79.9 

233,778 

64.60 

1912— 

30 

85 

2,550 

76 

1,938 

64.60 

3,711 

113.4 

420,647 

50.5 

212,550 

57.28 

1913— 

30 

80 

2.400 

82 

1,968 

65.60 

3,668 

90.4 

331,525 

68.7 

227,903 

62.13 

1914 _ 

33 

52 

1,716 

92 

1,579 

47.84 

3,711 

110.5 

409,921 

48.7 

199,460 

53.75 

1915 _ 

35 

90 

3,150 

73 

2,300 

65.70 

3,734 

96.3 

359,721 

61.7 

221,992 

59.45 

1916 _ 

40 

95 

3,800 

140 

5,320 

133.00 

3,565 

80.5 

286,953 

146.1 

419,333 

117.62 

1917— 

50 

90 

4,500 

143 

6,435 

128.70 

4,384 

100.8 

442,108 

122.8 

512,774 

123.81 

1918— 

65 

95 

6,175 

135 

8,336 

128.25 

4.295 

95.9 

411,860 

119.3 

491,527 

114.44 

1919* _ 

47 

80 

3,760 

163' 

6,129 

130.40 

3,542 

91.2 

322,867 

159.5 

514,855 

145.36 

1919 _ 

36 

80 

2,851, 

3,252 

89.3 

290,428 

1920— 

46 

91 

4,186 

142 

5,944 

129.22 

3,657 

110.3 

403,296' 

114.5 

461,778 

126.27 

1921 _ 

46 

t  88 

4,048 

143 

5,789 

125.84 

3,941 

91.8 

361,659 

110. 1 

39S,362 

101 .08 

1922**_ 

48 

94 

4,512 

101 

4,557 

94.94 

4,331 

104.2 

451,185 

58.2 

262,608 

60.63 

*  Revisions  based  on  1919  census. 


**  Subject  to  revision  December,  1923. 


Agricultural  Graphics 


25 


vD 

v_D 

CO 


CO  CO  CO 


£ 

CO 


00 

CO  CD 


cvi 

<r> 

co 


O  •'J  vD 

O  ^  o  CD 

<r>  <XD  CD  cr> 


00  O  ^  ^  CD  Q  N 

^  ^  —  H2  CT)  cn 


»J)  CD  O  CvJ  xt  VO  OD 

\£}  cD  t —  t- —  fc—  t—  D— 

CO  CO  CD  CO  OQ  <Q  OO 


VD 

CD 

CO 


CO  CD  ^ 


(T>  m  (D  CD  2? 

CD  <D  <0  CO  00 


sag 

^  CD  OD 


CD  O 

S  22 


S3  ±  iS  52  S  S3 

OD  CD  OD  OD  OD  CD 


(60 

154 

148 

142 

136 

.130 

124 

116 

.  M2 
D 

ii0S 

100 


M 

M 
*  1 

•  » 

»  1 

1  » 
f 

V 

/ 

1 

1 

1 

1 

POTATOES 

-  Form  price  Dec  1,  yearly,  N.C 

-  -  -  10-yeor  average  ending  in  years  indicated,  N  C. 

.  .  .  US. 

Vjl 

» 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

^  i 

l 

i 

1 

1 

*1 

I 

1 

1  t 

1  1 

/ 

/ 

!  \ 

1 

. ! 

/ 

1  1 

1  1 

1  t 

/ 

/ 

/ 

i/ 

/ 

/''v 

/* 

//  \ 

1  * 

/  > 

» • 

/ 

1 

/ 

/ 

A, 

/ 

• 

/ 

\ 

# 

> 

\ 

A 

•  ' 

/ 

/ 

'n/ 

y 

/ 

Ac' 

\  ^ 

/ 

1 

\ 

l 

,/ 

1  1 

I  '< 

< 

'  .» 

^Vj 

...y 

1 

V‘-  - 

/ — 

/ 

\i  / 

\ 

\ 

1 

1 

1 

,<r 

1 

H 

L... 

.-V 

\ 

_ 

160 
154 
M6 
W2 
136 
130 
124 
II 8 
IIZ 
106 
100 
34 
86 
62 
76 
70 
64 

58 

52 

46 

40 


£ 


£  52 

75 

70 

64 

58 

52 

46 

40 


CHART  24.— IRISH  POTATOES:  FARM  PRICE,  N.  C.  AND  U.  S. 


Cents  per  Bushel  Bushels  per  Acre 


26 


Agricultural  Graphics 


CHART  25— IRISH  POTATOES:  VALUE  PER  ACRE,  N.  C.  AND  U.  S. 


large  percentage  advance  in  both  the  state  and  the  United  States 
in  the  price  and  in  the  value  per  acre  of  this  crop.  Comparing 
the  two  decades  1866-75  and  1913-22,  we  find  for  North  Caro¬ 
lina  a  gain  in  farm  price  per  bushel  of  104.0  percent  and  for  the 
United  States  a  gain  of  83.9  percent;  while  in  value  per  acre  the 
gain  for  North  Carolina  was  103.6  percent  and  for  the  United 
States  93.0  percent. 

Sweet  .potatoes.  In  this  crop  we  take  our  place  among  the 
five  leading  states,  producing  10.4  percent  of  the  total  United 
States  crop  average  for  1917-21  ;  but  this  production  represents 
only  2.7  percent  of  our  aggregate  crop  values  for  the  same  years. 
Our  average  yield  per  acre  (chart  26)  has  been  uniformly  above 
the  United  States  average,  and,  comparing  the  decades  1866-75 
and  1913-22,  we  have  gained  7.7  percent  in  yield  per  acre  while 
the  United  States  has  gained  4.6  percent.  In  farm  price  per 
bushel  (chart  27),  while  our  average  has  been  lower  than  the 
United  States  average,  we  have  gained  in  the  period  considered 
57 .0  percent  while  the  United  States  has  gained  only  20.4  percent. 
The  result  is  that  in  recent  years  our  value  per  acre  (chart  28) 
has  risen  above  the  United  States  average.  Our  gain  in  value 
per  acre  in  the  period  considered  has  been  72.1  percent,  while 
the  gain  for  the  United  States  as  a  whole  has  been  26.3  percent. 


Agricultural  Graphics 


27 


TABLE  VI— SWEET  POTATOES 


»-< 

03 

© 


NORTH  CAROLINA 


> 

CO 
03  « 

« 

too 

Jh  O 
<1  rH 


U 

©  . 

O,  co 

Pi 
>  © 
<1  H 


Pi  . 
O  m 
+2  2 

Td  o 
o  o 

*  ° 
pH  rH 


© 

© 

’£ 

Ph 


O 


c  . 

>H  ©) 

c3  © 

>  pi 
<1  ,a 


OJ 


“  DQ 

a  Q 

So 
s-  o 
03  O 
pH  rH 


U  O 
03  Q 

rH  I 

ai 

o.2 
©  ^ 
QPh 


UNITED  STATES 


?H  02 

c©  a> 

w  s 

©H 
i£0 
A  o 
S° 

<5  rH 


fH 

<X> 


0) 


iff! 


>*  o 
>  © 
<1  <J 


Q  02 

*-£  3 

HO  o 
o  o 
° 

Ph  rH 


.25 

£  I 


Si  o 
03  © 

PhQ 
>  pi 


« 

© 

0  • 

.  to 

c3  'q 

£  o 

fH  O 
o3  O 

pH  rH 


CO 

c3  —  © 

pq  So 

©  ^  | 
<3  rH  i 

^  O) 

«.s 

c3  a)  ^ 

>QPh 


1S68 _ 

S3 

66 

54.78 

102.2 

79  0 

80  71 

1S69 _ 

76 

71 

53.96 

78.7 

92  8 

73  03 

1870— 

108 

60 

64.80 

107.4 

8?  1 

88  18 

1871 _ 

101 

62 

62.62 

99.0 

78  4 

77  62 

1872 _ 

115 

49 

56.35 

83.5 

79  7 

1873— 

98 

55 

53.90 

97.2 

76.9 

1874 _ 

95 

55 

52.25 

82.4 

76.1 

62  71 

1875 _ 

90 

52 

46.80 

89.0 

67.2 

59.81 

1876.  _ 

1877— 

1878— 

112 

98.9 

1879 _ 

94 

49 

_ 

46.06 

90.4 

56.6 

51.17 

18S0„ 

100 

45 

45.00 

101.8 

51.5 

52.43 

1881--. 

1882— 

95 

45 

42.75 

96.2 

60.5 

58  20 

1883— - 

88 

46 

40.48 

57.1 

44  54 

1884 

78 

46 

35.88  | 

78.8 

57.5 

45  31 

1885' 

96 

41 

1 

39.36 

96.4 

50.3 

48.49 

1S86 

96 

41 

39.36 

87.5 

51.5 

45.00 

1887 

43 

80.8 

57.6 

46.54 

1888 

95 

43 

40.85 

97.2 

47.9 

46.56 

1889 

95 

43 

40  85 

87.2 

53.2 

46.39 

1S80 

114 

40 

45.60 

99.3 

53.8 

53.42 

1891 

101 

44 

44.44 

88.5 

50.1 

44.34 

1899; 

95 

88.0 

1893 

104 

87.2 

1SQ-1 

100 

37 

37  00 

92.4 

45.5 

42.04 

1895 

89 

54 

48  06 

79.1 

49.0 

38.76 

1S9G 

80 

32 

25.60 

70.8 

44.3 

31.36 

1897 

SO 

34 

27.20 

72.0 

50.0 

36.00 

1S98 

95 

98.3 

7899 _ 

69 

S4 

5,782 

40 

2,313 

34.40 

537 

79.1 

42,517 

52.9 

22,476 

41.11 

1900— 

69 

88 

6,072 

42 

2,550 

36.96 

544 

88.9 

4S,346 

50.6 

24,478 

45.00 

1901 _ 

71 

87 

6,177 

46 

2,841 

40.02 

547 

81.7 

44,697 

57.5 

25,720 

47.02 

1902— 

70 

88 

6,160 

46 

2,834 

40.48 

532 

85.2 

45,344 

58.1 

26,35S 

49.55 

1903— 

72 

97 

6,984 

45 

3,143 

43.65 

548 

89.2 

48,870 

5S.3 

28,478 

51.97 

1904- _ 

73 

100 

7,300 

50 

3,650 

50.00 

54S 

88.9 

48,705 

60.4 

29,424 

53.69 

1905 _ 

73 

95 

6,935 

47 

3,259 

44.65 

551 

92.6 

51,034 

58.3 

29,734 

53.98 

1906-- 

75 

87 

6,525 

50 

3,262 

43.50 

554 

90.2 

49,948 

62.2 

31,063 

56.07 

1907 _ 

78 

90 

7,020 

60 

4,212 

54.00 

i  565 

88.2 

49,813 

70.0 

34,858 

61.70 

1908— 

80 

93 

7,440 

53 

3,943 

49.29 

599 

92.4 

55,352 

66.1 

36,564 

61.04 

1909 _ 

85 

100 

8,1,93 

57 

4,841 

56.43 

641 

92.4 

59,232 

69.4 

41,052 

61.76 

1910— 

84 

105 

8,820 

55 

4,851 

57.75 

641 

93.5 

59,938 

67.1 

40,216 

62.74 

1911 _ 

77 

86  ' 

6,622 

63 

4,172 

54.18 

605 

90.1 

54,538 

75.5 

41,202 

68.10 

1912— 

75 

90 

6,750 

62 

4,185 

55.  SO 

583 

95.2 

55,479 

72.6 

40,264 

69.06 

1913— 

80 

100 

8,000 

61 

4,880 

61.00 

625 

94.5 

59,057 

72.6 

42,884 

68.61 

1914 _ 

76 

90 

6,840 

65 

4,446 

58.50 

603 

93.S 

56,574 

73.0 

41,294 

6S.48 

1915- - 

85 

105 

8,925 

56 

4,998 

5S.80 

731 

103.5 

75,639 

62.1 

46,980 

64.27 

1916 _ 

87 

107 

9,309 

■  75 

6,982 

80.25 

774 

91.7 

70,955 

84.8 

60,141 

77.70 

1917— 

90 

95 

8,550 

105 

8,978 

99.75 

919 

91.2 

83,822 

110.8 

92,916 

101.11 

1918.  - 

95 

110 

10,450 

132 

13,794 

145.20 

940 

93.5 

87,924 

135.2 

118,863 

126.45 

1919* _ 

87 

102 

9,309 

138 

12,846 

147.66 

941 

103.2 

97,126 

134.4 

130,514 

138.70 

1920—- 

99 

104 

10,296 

114 

11,737 

118.56 

1992 

104.8 

103,925 

113.4 

117,834 

118.78 

1921— - 

102 

101 

10,302 

97 

9,993 

97.97 

1,066 

92.5 

98,654 

8S.1 

86,S94 

81.51 

1922**- 

110 

113 

12,430 

80 

9,944 

90.40 

1,116 

!  98.1 

109,534 

77.1 

84,492 

75.71 

**  Subject  to  revision 

December, 

1923. 

*  Revisions 

based  on  1919  census. 

28  Agricultural  Graphics 


CHART  28. — SWEET  POTATOES:  VALUE  PER  ACRE,  N.  C.  AND  U.  S. 


TABLE  VII — HAT  (Tame) 


NORTH  CAROLINA 


UNITED  STATES 


ca 

a> 

Acr’g«  Harv’t’d 
1000  Acres 

Av.  Yield  per 
Acre — Tons 

Production 

1000  Tons 

Av.  Farm  Price 

T.  Dec.  1 — Doll 

Farm  Val.Dec.l 

1000  Dolls. 

Val.  Acre  Basis 

Dec.  1  Farm 

Price — Dolls. 

Acr’ge  Harv’t’d 

1000  Acres 

Av.  Yield  per 

Acre — Tons 

Production 

1000  Tons 

Av.  Farm  Price 

T.  Dec.  1 — Dolls 

Farm  Val.Dec.l 

1000  Dolls. 

Val.  Acre  Basis 

Dec.  1  Farm 

Price — Dolls. 

1866 _ 

126 

1.30 

163 

9.04 

1,476 

11.75 

17,669 

1.23 

21,779 

10.14 

220,836 

12  50 

1867— 

119 

1.50 

179 

8.64 

1,546 

12.96 

20,021 

1.31 

26,277 

10.21 

268'301 

13.40 

1868 _ 

149 

1.25 

186 

11.16 

2,076 

13.95 

21,542 

1.21 

26,142 

10.0S 

263^589 

12.24 

1869 _ 

111 

1.44 

160 

9.60 

1,535 

13.82 

18,591 

1.42 

26,420 

10.18 

268,933 

14.47 

1869.  _ 

84 

27,316 

1870 _ 

121 

1.40 

169 

10.30 

1,740 

14.42 

19,862 

1.23 

24,525 

12.47 

305,743 

15.39 

1871 _ 

74 

1.13 

S4 

11.06 

929 

12.50 

19,009 

1.17 

22,239 

14.30 

317,940 

16.73 

1872 _ 

75 

1.20 

90 

12.53 

1,128 

15.04 

20,319 

1.17 

23,813 

12.94 

308,025 

15.16 

1873 _ 

79 

1.20 

94 

11.97 

1,131 

14.38 

21,894 

1.15 

25,085 

12.53 

314,241 

14.35 

1874 _ 

84 

1.25 

105 

13.37 

1,401 

16.71 

21,770 

1.15 

25,134 

11.94 

300,222 

13.79 

1875 _ 

88 

1.25 

110 

10.91 

1,200 

13.64 

23,508 

1.19 

27,874 

10.78 

300,378 

12.78 

1876 _ 

93 

1.25 

116 

30.19 

1,184 

12.74 

25,283 

1.22 

30,867 

8.97 

276,991 

10.96 

1877— 

93 

1.35 

126 

9.41 

1,185 

12.70 

25,368 

1.25 

31,629 

S.37 

264,880 

10.44 

1878 _ 

93 

1.43 

133 

9.66 

1,285 

13.81 

26,931 

1.47 

39,608 

7.20 

285,016 

10.58 

1879— 

102 

1.39 

142 

11.22 

1,593 

15.60 

30,631 

1.30 

39,862 

9.31 

371,045 

12.11 

1879— 

102 

90 

30,631 

1.15 

35,151 

1880 _ 

74 

1.53 

114 

10.55 

1,199 

16.14 

25,864 

1.23 

31,925 

11.65 

371,811 

14.38 

1881 _ 

79 

1.15 

91 

15.80 

1,436 

18.17 

30,889 

1.14 

35,135 

11.82 

415,131 

13.44 

1882— 

81 

1.19 

97 

11.18 

1,087 

13.30 

32,340 

1.18 

38,138 

9.73 

371,170 

11.48 

1S83 _ 

84 

l.]5 

96 

10.77 

1,039 

12.39 

35,516 

1.32 

46,864 

8.19 

383,834 

10.81 

1884 _ 

81 

1.30 

106 

10.60 

1,122 

13.78 

38,572 

1.26 

48,470 

8.17 

396,139 

10.27 

1885 _ 

102 

.95 

97 

11.68 

1,129 

11.10 

39,850 

1.12 

44,732 

8.71 

389,753 

9.78 

1886 _ 

107 

1.04 

111 

11.00- 

1,223 

11.44 

36,502 

1.15 

41,796 

S.46 

353,438 

9.68 

1887 _ 

139 

1.15 

160 

10.57 

1,689 

12.16 

37,665 

1.10 

41,454 

9.97 

413,440 

10.98 

1888.. . 

140 

1.10 

154 

13.10 

2,022 

14.41 

38,592 

1.21 

46,643 

S.76 

408,500 

10.59 

1889 _ 

170 

1.00 

170 

11.30 

1,921 

11.30 

39,004 

1.26 

49,181 

7.76 

381,481 

9.78 

18S9.  . 

170 

39,004 

1890— 

170 

1.35 

230 

11.91 

2,739 

16.08 

40,038 

1.23 

49,057 

8.18 

401,111 

10.02 

1891 _ 

170 

1.10 

187 

11.00 

2,057 

12.10 

41,25S 

1.18 

48,759 

8.89 

433,276 

10.50 

1S92 _ 

ISO 

1.20 

216 

10.55 

2,279 

12.66 

42,191 

1.17 

49,238 

8.95 

440,710 

10.45 

1893 _ 

180 

1.70 

306 

11.11 

3,400 

18.89 

42,413 

1.31 

55,575 

9.48 

527,044 

12.43 

1894 _ 

180 

1.45 

261 

10.93 

2,853 

15.85 

42,772 

1.18 

50,468 

8.90 

452,079 

10.57 

1895 _ 

190 

1.63 

310 

10.14 

3,143 

16.53 

40,832 

1.02 

41,838 

9.46 

395,647 

9.69 

1896 _ 

190 

1.26 

239 

10.75 

2,569 

13.54 

40,978 

1.33 

54,380 

7.48 

406,957 

9.93 

1897 _ 

200 

1.25 

250 

9.75 

2,438 

12.19 

41,336 

1.42 

58,878 

7.28 

428,919 

10.38 

1898 _ 

200 

1.70 

340 

9.30 

3,162 

15.81 

43,120 

1.55 

66,772 

6.63 

442,905 

10.27 

1S99 _ 

204 

1.50 

306 

10.10 

3,091 

15.15 

43,127 

1.33 

57,450 

8.20 

470,844 

10.92 

1899  .. 

204 

1.03 

211 

43,127 

1.25 

53,828 

1900 _ 

200 

1.41 

282 

11.20 

3,158 

15.79 

42,070 

1.27 

53,231 

9.72 

517,399 

12.30 

1901 _ 

210 

1.66 

349 

10.80 

3,769 

17.93 

42,066 

1.33 

55,819 

9.91 

553,328 

13.15 

1902 _ 

220 

1.44 

317 

12.25 

3,883 

17.64 

42,962 

1.52 

65,296 

9.19 

599,781 

13.96 

1903 _ 

230 

1.60 

368 

13.42 

4,939 

21.47 

43,400 

1.57 

68,154 

9.35 

637,485 

14.69 

1904 _ 

240 

1.72 

413 

14.56 

6,013 

25.04 

44,645 

1.55 

69,192 

8.91 

616,369 

13.81 

1905 _ 

250 

1.60 

400 

12.80 

5,120 

20.48 

45,991 

1.59 

72,973 

8.59 

627,023 

13.63 

1906 _ 

260 

1.54 

400 

15.00 

6,000 

23.10 

47,891 

1.39 

66,341 

10.43 

692,116 

14.45 

1907— 

270 

1.50 

405 

16.50 

6,682 

24.75 

49,098 

1.47 

72,261 

11.78 

850,915 

17.33 

1908 _ 

300 

1.50 

450 

13.50 

6,075 

20.25 

51,196 

1.53 

78.440 

9.14 

716,644 

14.00 

1909 _ 

315 

1.38 

435 

14.40 

6,264 

19.87 

51,041 

1.46 

74,384 

10.58 

786,722 

15.41 

1909 

315 

.95 

299 

51,041 

1.35 

68,833 

1910.. _ 

315 

1.50 

472 

14.60 

6,891 

21.90 

51,015 

1.36 

69,378 

12.14 

842,252 

16.51 

1911— 

290 

1.05 

304 

17.00 

5,168 

17.85 

48,240 

1.14 

54,916 

14.29 

784,926 

16.27 

1912 _ 

293 

1.30 

381 

16.70 

6,363 

21.71 

49,530 

1.47 

72,691 

11.79 

856,695 

17.30 

1913— 

320 

1.31 

419 

16.50 

6,914 

21.62 

48,954 

1.31 

64,116 

12.43 

797,077 

16.28 

1914 _ 

320 

1.15 

368 

17.10 

6,293 

19.66 

49,145 

1.43 

70,071 

11.12 

779,068 

15.85 

1915— 

350 

1.85 

648 

16.50 

10,692 

30.52 

51.10S 

1.68 

85,920 

10.63 

913,644 

17.88 

1916 _ 

440 

1.30 

572 

17.50 

10,010 

22.75 

55,721 

1.64 

91,192 

11.22 

1,022,930 

18.36 

1917— 

506 

1.13 

572 

19.70 

11,268 

22.26 

55,203 

1.51 

83,308 

17.09 

1,423,766 

25.79 

1918— 

640 

1.20 

768 

21.00 

16,128 

25.20 

55,755 

1.37 

76,660 

20.13 

1,543,494 

27.68 

1919* _ 

682 

1.02 

696 

24.20 

16,843 

24.68 

56,888 

1.52 

86,359 

20.08 

1,734,085 

30.4S 

1919 

1920 _ 

640 

1.05 

672 

23.00 

15,456 

24.15 

58,101 

1.51 

87,S55 

17.76 

1,560,235 

26.85 

1921 _ 

690 

1.30 

897 

19.80 

17,761 

25.74 

58,769 

1.40 

82,379 

12.11 

997,527 

16.97 

1922**. 

800 

1.40 

1,120 

18.20 

| 

20,384 

25.48 

61,20S 

1.58 

96,687 

12.59 

1,217,044 

19.88 

*  Revisions  based  on  1919  census. 


Subject  to  revision  December,  1923. 


Dollars  per  Ton  Tons  per  Acre 


30 


Agricultural  Graphics 


8 


CHART  30.— HAY,  TAME:  FARM  PRICE,  N.  C.  AND  U.  S. 


9 

0 


Agricultural  Graphics 


31 


Hay.  There  have  been  many  ups  and  downs  in  the  average 
yield  per  acre  (chart  29)  of  tame  hay  in  North  Carolina,  though 
the  geneial  trend  for  the  United  States  has  been  in  the  main 
steadily  upward.  We  are  at  present  on  the  upward  path,  but 
there  has  been  a  big  decline  from  our  levels  around  1904,  when 
we  reached  our  top  notch.  Comparing  the  averages  for  1913-22 
and  1866-75,  we  find  that  North  Carolina  has  declined  in  yield 
per  acre  1.6  percent  while  the  United  States  has  gained  22.2 
percent.  W  e  shall  have  to  change  this  condition  when  we  in¬ 
crease  our  livestock  to  the  extent  that  is  becoming  urgently 
necessary.  Our  farm  price  per  ton  of  hay  (chart  30)  has  been 
almost  constantly  considerably  higher  than  the  United  States 
average,  and  has  increased  78.2  percent,  while  the  United  States 
has  gained  in  price  of  hay  per  ton  only  25.6  percent.  Conse¬ 
quently  our  value  per  acre  of  hay  (chart  31)  has  been  almost 
uniformly  much  above  the  United  States  average  and  our  gain, 
comparing  the  decades  1866-75  and  1913-22,  has  been  74.0  per- 


CHART  31.— HAY,  TAME:  VALUE  PER  ACRE,  N.  C.  AND  U.  S. 


32 


Agricultural  Graphics 


TABLE  VIII — COTTON* 


NORTH  CAROLINA 


UNITED  STATES 


Year 

Acr’ge  Picked 
1000  Acres 

Av.  Yield  per 
Acre — Lbs. 

Production 

1000  Bales 

Av.  Farm  Price 
Lb. Dec. 1 — Cts. 

Farm  Val.Dec.l 

1000  Dolls. 

Yal.  Acre  Basis 

Dec.  1  Farm 

Price — Dolls. 

Acr’ge  Picked 

1000  Acres 

Av.  Yield  per 

Acre — Lbs. 

Production 

1000  Bales 

Av.  Farm  Price 

Lb. Dec. 1 — Cts. 

Farm  Val.Dec.l 

1000  Dolls. 

Val.  Acre  Basis 

Dec.  1  Farm 

Price— —Dolls. 

1866  __ 

386 

250 

91 

7  699  199  0 

1,750 

1867  __ 

559 

160 

150 

7  82S 

189.8 

2  340 

1868 

380 

176 

140 

6  799 

192  2 

2,380 

— 

1869 

418 

145 

145 

7  743 

196.9 

3,012 

1870- . 

452 

175 

170 

»  ass’ 

1  Q»  9 

3  800 

1871—. 

388 

143 

127 

7  558  148  2 

2553 

1872___ 

451 

173 

ISO 

s’  920 

1873 _ 

514 

159 

176 

9510 

179  7 

3  683 

1874-  - 

609 

172 

238 

11  764 

147  5 

3  941 

1875— 

621 

156 

218 

11  934 

190  6 

5  123 

1876 _ 

609 

184 

210 

9.0 

10,085 

16.56 

11,677 

167.8 

4’, 438 

9.0 

174,724 

14.96 

1877— 

585 

1S6 

242 

12  133 

163  8 

4  370 

1878 _ 

590 

169 

222 

8.4 

8,383 

14.20 

12,344 

191.2  i 

5,244 

8.2 

192,515 

15.59 

1879— 

893 

156 

390 

11.0 

15,327 

17.16 

UAS0 

181.0 

5,755 

10.3 

269,305 

18.60 

1880 _ 

974 

198 

411 

10.0 

19,276 

19.80 

15,951 

184.5 

6,343 

9.8 

289,083 

18.12 

1881 _ 

1,061 

150 

380 

16  711 

149  8 

1  5  45$ 

1882 _ 

1,051 

194 

463 

9.5 

19,362 

18.43 

16,277 

185^7 

6,957 

9.1 

275,513 

16.93 

1883— 

1,051 

177 

398 

9.3 

17,293 

16.46 

16,778 

164.8 

5,701 

9.1 

250,977 

14.96 

1884 _ 

1,061 

175 

404 

9.3 

17,269 

16.28 

17,440 

153.8 

5,682 

9.2 

246,575 

14.14 

1885 ___ 

1,072 

157 

407 

8.5 

14,301 

13.34 

18,301 

164.4 

6,575 

8.4 

251,775 

13.76 

1886— 

1,072 

157 

366 

8.3 

13,965 

13.03 

18,455 

169.5 

6,446 

8.1 

251,856 

13.65 

1887 _ 

1,066 

191 

444 

8.7 

17,719 

16.62 

18,641 

182.7 

7,020 

8.5 

290,901 

15.61 

1888 _ 

1,072 

165 

365' 

8.5 

15,030 

14.02 

19,059 

ISO.  4 

6,941 

8.5 

292,139 

15.33 

1889 _ 

1,14  7 

98 

336 

8.5 

9,556 

8.33 

20,175 

159.7 

!  7,1,73 

8.5 

275,249 

13.64 

1890 _ 

1,082 

182 

490 

8.7 

17,135 

15.S3 

19,512 

187.0 

8,674 

8.6 

313,360 

16.06 

1891 _ 

1,017 

178 

415 

7.4 

13,399 

13.17 

19,059 

179.4 

9,018 

7.2 

247,633 

12.99 

1892 _ 

773 

183 

300 

8.6 

12,167 

15.74 

15,911 

209.2 

6,664 

8.3 

277,194 

17.42 

1893— 

1,180 

174 

400 

7.2 

14,783 

12.53 

19,525 

149.9 

7,493 

7.0 

204,983 

10.50 

1894 _ 

1,297 

210 

455 

5.0 

13,613 

10.50 

23,688 

195.3 

9,476 

4.6 

212,335 

8.96 

1895— 

1,050 

168 

398 

8.2 

14,467 

13.78 

20,185 

155.6 

7,161 

7.6 

238,503 

11.82 

1896 _ 

1,229 

208 

522 

6.7 

17,096 

13.94 

23,273 

1S4.9 

8,533 

6.7 

286,169 

12.30 

1897— 

1,302 

184 

647 

7.0 

16,775 

12.88 

24,320 

182.7 

10,898 

6.7 

296,816 

12.20 

1898— 

1,312 

227 

630 

5.9 

17,568 

13.39 

24,967 

220.6 

11,189 

5.7 

315,449 

12.63 

1899* _ 

1,087 

193 

440 

7.2 

15,854 

13.90 

24,275 

183.8 

9,345 

7.0 

326,215 

13.41 

1900 _ 

1,143 

199 

477 

9.4 

22,432 

18.71 

24,933 

194.4 

10,123 

9.2 

463,310 

IS.  58 

1901 _ 

1,395 

142 

416 

7.2 

14,969 

10.22 

26,774 

170.0 

9,510 

7.0 

334,088 

12.48 

1902— 

1,111 

236 

550 

8.0 

21,982 

18.88 

27,175 

187.3 

10,631 

7.6 

403,718 

14.86 

1903— 

1,201 

210 

529 

10.6 

28,021 

12.26 

27,052 

174.3 

9,851 

10.5 

516,763 

19.10 

1904 _ 

1,439 

233 

704 

9.2 

32,373 

21.44 

31,215 

205.9 

13,438 

9.0 

603,438 

19.33 

1905 _ 

1,230 

240 

619 

10.8 

33,434 

25.92 

27,110 

186.6 

10,575 

10.8 

569,791 

21.02 

1906- . 

1,374 

201 

579 

9.5 

27,518 

19.10 

31,374 

202.5 

13,274 

9.6 

635,534 

20.26 

1907— 

1,408 

205 

605 

10.2 

30,871 

20.91 

29,660 

179.1 

11,107 

10.4 

575,226 

19.39 

1908— 

1,458 

211 

647 

9.0 

29,113 

18.99 

32,444 

194.9 

13,242 

8.7 

575,092 

17.73 

1909 _ 

1,359 

210 

601 

13.9 

41,742 

29.19 

30,938 

154.3 

10,005 

13.9 

697,681 

22.55 

1910 _ 

1,478 

227 

706 

14.1 

49,783 

32.01 

32,403 

170.7 

11,609 

14.1 

820,407 

25.32 

1911— 

1,624 

315 

1,076 

8.8 

47,336 

27.72 

36,045 

207.7 

15,693 

8.8 

687,888 

19.08 

1912— 

1,545 

267 

866 

12.2 

52,805 

32.57 

34,283 

190.9 

13,703 

11.9 

817,055 

23.83 

1913— 

1,576 

239 

793 

12.6 

49,930 

30.11 

37,089 

182.0 

14,156 

12.2 

862,708 

23.26 

1914— 

1,527 

290 

931 

6.9 

32,107 

20.01 

36,832 

209.2 

16,135 

6.8 

549,036 

14.91 

1915 _ 

1,282 

260 

699 

11.2 

39,172 

29.12 

31,412 

170.3 

11,192 

11.3 

631,460 

20.10 

1916— 

1,451 

215 

655 

19.4 

63,496 

41.71 

34,985 

156.6 

11,450 

19.6 

1,122,295 

32.08 

1917 _ 

1,515 

194 

618 

27.7 

85,591 

53.74 

33,841 

159.7 

11,302 

27.7 

1,566,198 

46.28 

1918 _ 

1,600 

268 

898 

26.4 

118,504 

70.75 

36,OOS 

159.6 

12,041 

27.6 

1,663,633 

46.20 

1919 _ 

1,490 

266 

830 

35.2 

146,232 

93.63 

33,566 

161.5 

11,421 

35.6 

2,034,658 

60.62 

1920— 

1,587 

275 

925 

14.5 

67,045 

39.88 

35,878 

17S.4 

13,440 

13.9 

933,658 

26.02 

1921— 

1,403 

264 

776 

16.4 

63,650 

43.30 

30,509 

124.5 

7,954 

16.2 

643,933 

21.05 

1922**. 

1,626 

250 

852 

24.5 

104,370 

61.25 

33,742 

141.6 

9,964 

23.8 

1,192,461 

35.21 

0 


*  From  1899  to  1921  production  figures  are  census  returns  from  ginners. 

**  Subject  to  revision. 


Agricultural  Graphics 


33 


cent,  while  the  United  States  gain  in  value  per  acre  of  this  crop 
has  been  53.4  percent.  These  high  prices  for  hay  in  North 
Carolina  account  for  the  fact  that  while  our  hay  production  in 
191/ -21  constituted  only  nine-tenths  of  one  percent  of  the  entire 
United  States  crop  the  value  of  our  crop  represented  in  these 
years  3.7  percent  of  our  aggregate  crop  values. 

Cotton.  Conditions  with  regard  to  our  cotton  crop  are 
changing  so  radically  and  so  rapidly  that  it  is  impossible  to  fore¬ 
cast  the  future  from  the  past.  In  1917-21  our  cotton  crop  con¬ 
stituted  7.2  percent  of  the  United  States  total  cotton  crop,  and  the 
value  of  our  cotton  crop  was  22.8  percent  of  our  aggregate  crop 
values.  Furthermore  in  the  last  two  years  we  have  been  among 
the  leading  five  states  in  the  production  of  cotton — not  because  of 
gains  on  our  part,  but  because  of  greater  losses  on  the  part  of 
states  that  have  succumbed  more  completely  to  the  boll  weevil 
than  we  have  as  yet.  But  that  our  history  in  this  crop  will  paral- 


CHART  32.— COTTON:  YIELD  PER  ACRE,  N.  C.  AND  U.  S. 


34 


Agricultural  Graphics 


lei  that  of  the  other  cotton  states  when  struck  by  the  boll  weevil, 
can  hardly  be  doubted.  Chart  32  shows  the  trend  of  our  yield 
per  acre  mounting  steadily  and  rapidly  almost  without  break 
until  1920,  but  the  decline  since  that  date  is  ominous.  It  sounds 
the  crack  of  doom  unless  we  reorganize  our  farming  system, 
improve  our  marketing  methods,  and  raise  our  level  in  livestock 
and  dairy  farming. 

Comparing  the  decades  1866-75  and  1913-22,  we  will  be  seen 
to  have  gained  in  per-acre  yield  of  cotton  47.4  percent,  while 
the  United  States  has  declined  6.7  percent  in  per-acre  yield. 

The  cotton  market  is  a  world  market,  consequently  prices 
in  North  Carolina  and  the  United  States  have  kept  very  closely 
together  (chart  33).  The  gain  in  both  the  state  and  the  United 
States  in  price  per  pound  in  the  period  considered  has  been  close 
to  108  percent.  Because  of  our  high  yields,  however,  our  gain 

in  value  per  acre  (chart  34)  has  been  192.5  percent,  while  the 

United  States  gain  has  been  105.1  percent. 

But  this  it  must  be  borne  in  mind  is  past  history,  and  the 
future  is  all  unknown. 

Tobacco.  Unlike  our  cotton  yield,  our  tobacco  yield  per  acre 
is  by  no  means  high  (chart  35).  Moreover,  a  comparison  of  the 
two  decades  1866-75  and  1913-22  shows  that  wie  have  gained 
only  9.0  percent  in  yield  per  acre,  while  the  United  States  gain 

is  12.5  percent.  It  is  to  our  large  tobacco  acreage  that  we  owe 

our  position  among  the  five  leading  tobacco  states,  and  our  pro¬ 
duction  of  23.2  percent  of  the  total  United  States  crop  on  an 
average  for  the  years  1917-21.  This  large  production  brought 
the  value  of  our  tobacco  crop  in  these  years  up  to  over  a  quarter 
of  our  aggregate  state  crop  values  (25.7  percent). 

Our  price  per  pound  has  been  uniformly  somewhat  above  the 
United  States  price  per  pound  (chart  36)  ;  but,  because  of  our 
comparatively  low  yield  per  acre,  our  value  per  acre  (chart  37) 
has  been  until  recent  years  considerably  below  the  United  States 
average.  However,  within  the  last  five  years  our  gains  in  farm 
price  per  pound  have  been  such  as  to  put  us  above  the  United 
States  average  in  value  per  acre.  Comparing  the  decades  1866-75 
and  1913-22,  North  Carolina  is  found  to  have  gained  in  price  per 
pound  134.6  percent,  and  the  United  States  120.1  percent;  and  in 


Gents  per  Pound 


Cents  per  Pound 


0LLAR5  PER  Acre 


Agricultural  Graphics 


35 


TABLE  IX— TOBACCO 


Year 

NORTH  CAROLINA 

Acr’ge  Harv’t’d 
1000  Acres 

Av.  Yield  per 
Acre — Lbs. 

Production 

1000  Lbs. 

Av.  Farm  Price 
Lb. Dec. 1 — Cts. 

Farm  Val.Dec.l 

1000  Dolls. 

Val.  Acre  Basis 

Dec.  1  Farm 

Price — Dolls. 

I860.— 

683 

14.3 

97  67 

1867 _ 

652 

12.4 

80.85 

1868 _ 

657 

12.4 

81.47 

1869 _ 

508 

10.9 

55.37 

1870.. 

586 

12.7 

74.42 

1871— 

599 

9.3 

55.71 

1872  — 

666 

8.9 

59.27 

1873. 

591 

8.3 

49.05 

1874  — 

330 

14.4 

47.52 

1875 

500 

8.5 

42.50 

1876.. 

550 

8.2 

45.10 

1877 

1878  .. 

620 

6.0 

37.20 

1879—. 

556 

7.0 

38.92 

1SS0 

9.0 

50.85 

18S1 

443 

13.5 

59.80 

1882  .. 

500 

12.0 

60.00 

1883 

484 

12.5 

60.50 

1884  . 

501 

11.5 

57.62 

1885 

480 

10.6 

50.88 

1886  .. 

420 

9.5 

39.90 

18S7 

485 

10.0 

48.50 

1888— 

451 

8.0 

33.82 

1889  . 

375 

11.0 

48.73 

18-% 

560 

11.0 

61.60 

1891 

490 

9.6 

47.04 

1899 

485 

9.5 

46.0S 

18Q3 

509 

8.0 

40.72 

1894 

662 

9.0 

59.58 

1895 

800 

9.2 

73.60 

1 89ft 

510 

8.0 

40.80 

1897 

550 

1898 

550 

1899 

560 

36.96 

1899 _ 

'203 

628 

127,503 

6.6 

8,415 

1900— 

193 

618 

119,505 

7.0 

8,096 

43.26 

1901 _ 

189 

560 

105,808 

9.0 

9,714 

50.40 

1902— 

219 

650 

142,521 

7.0 

9,976 

45.50 

1903 _ 

215 

627 

134,729 

6.3 

8,488 

39.50 

1904 _ 

144 

685 

98,618 

8.6 

8,481 

5S.91 

1905 _ 

137 

608 

83,156 

8.8 

7,318 

53.50 

1906 _ 

120 

580 

69,808 

10.0 

6,981 

58.00 

1907 _ 

161 

625 

100,875 

11.0 

11,096 

68.75 

1908 _ 

200 

670 

134,000 

10.5 

14,070 

70.35 

1909 

240 

600 

144,000 

57.00 

1909 _ 

222 

626 

138,813 

9.5 

13,187 

1910... 

200 

600 

120,000 

10.6 

12,720 

63.60 

1911 _ 

140 

710 

99,400 

11.6 

11,530 

82.36 

1912. 

179 

620 

110,980 

16.0 

17,757 

99.20 

1913 _ 

250 

670 

167,500 

18.5 

30,988 

123.95 

1914 _ 

265 

650 

172,250 

11.5 

19,809 

74.75 

1915... 

320 

620 

19S,400 

11.2 

22,221 

69.44 

1916 _ 

320 

550 

176,000 

20.0 

35,200 

110.00 

1917— 

380 

630 

239,400 

31.5 

75,411 

198.45 

1918— 

468 

705 

329,940 

35.1 

115,809 

247.46 

1919*.. 

528 

616 

325,248 

53.6 

174,333 

330.18 

101Q 

ft  10 

3S 0  IftS 

1920  — 

625 

694 

433,750 

25.3 

109,739 

175.58 

1921  . 

450 

561 

252,450 

26.0 

65,637 

145.86 

1922**. 

515 

596 

306,940 

30.3 

93,003 

180.59 

UNITED  STATES 

Acr’ge  Harv’t’d 

1000  Acres 

Av.  Yield  per 

Acre — Lbs. 

Production 

1000  Lbs. 

Av.  Farm  Price 

Lb. Dec. 1 — Cts. 

Farm  Val.Dec.l 

1000  Dolls. 

Val.  Acre  Basis 

Dec.  1  Farm 

Price — Dolls. 

735.8 

9.6 

71.91 

634.6 

9.4 

59.82 

751.4 

9.3 

69.81 

569.1 

9.3 

58.05 

757.9 

9.6 

72.61 

750.3 

8.8 

66.40 

821.8 

9.2 

75.98 

775.3 

7.6 

59.10 

633.2 

11.8 

74  79 

678.6 

7.0 

47.32 

705.0 

6.8 

47.97 

723.1 

5.6 

40.70 

795.1 

5.8 

46.18 

740.7 

8.2 

60.44 

696.2 

9.6 

67.11 

764.1 

8.4 

64.32 

9.0 

63.34 

747.2 

8.2 

60.94 

747.8 

7.7 

57.49 

709.9 

7.4 

52.61 

645.2 

10.6 

68.44 

757.1 

7.7 

58.43 

645.0 

7.1 

46.58 

722.8 

8.3 

59.34 

747.4 

8.5 

63.77 

687.6 

9.3 

63.93 

687.1 

8.1 

55.70 

777.4 

6.8 

'  53.07 

775.4 

7.2 

56.12 

677.6 

6.0 

40.79 

645.9 

745.4 

728.5 

51.99 

1,101 

788.5 

868,113 

7.2 

62,104 

1,046 

778.0 

814,345 

6.6 

53,661 

51.28 

1,039 

7S8.0 

818,953 

7.1 

58,283 

56.08 

1,031 

797.3 

821,824 

7.0 

57,564 

55.85 

1,038 

786.3 

815,972 

6.8 

55,515 

53.50 

806 

819.0 

660,461 

8.1 

53,383 

66.20 

776 

815.6 

633,034 

8.5 

53,619 

68.96 

796  857.2 

682,429 

10.0 

68,233 

85.71 

821 !  850.5 

698,126 

10.2 

71,411 

87.00 

876 ! 820.2 

718,061 

10.3 

74,130 

S4.68 

1,180  804.3 

949,357 

81.10 

1,295  815.3  . 

1,055,765 

10.1 

106,599 

1,366  807.7 

1,103,415 

9.3 

102,142 

74.77 

1,013  893.7 

905,109 

9.4 

85,210 

84.13 

1,226 

785.5 

962,855 

10.8 

104,063 

84.89 

1,216  784.3 

953,734 

12.8 

122,481 

100.72 

1,224 

845.7 

1,034,679 

9.8 

101,411 

82.89 

1,370 

775.4 

1,062,237 

9.1 

96,281 

70.28 

1,413 

816.0 

1,153,278 

14.7 

169,672 

120.05 

1,518 

823.1 

1,249,276 

24.0 

300,449 

197.95 

1,647 

873.7 

1,439,071 

28.0 

402,264 

244.23 

1,951 

751.1 

1,465,481 

39.0 

570,868 

292.60 

1,861/ 

736.6 

1,372,993 

1,960 

807.3 

1,582,225 

21.2 

335,675 

171.26 

1,427 

749.6 

1,069,693 

19.9 

212,728 

149.07 

1,725 

768.0 

1,324,840 

23.1 

306,179 

177.50 

*  Revisions  based  on  1919  census.  **  Subject  to  revision  December,  1923. 


Cents  per  Pound  Pounds  per  Acre. 


36 


Agricultural  Graphics 


«0  CD 
VD  <£> 
CD  CD 


O 

r- 

QD 


£  g 

CD  CD 


{S  ?E  S  ® 

oo  CO  CO  CD 


& 

CO 


&8S<r>£r;c:>ooe>£S^ 

<D  ©  oo  CO  ©  W  W  o  m  C) 


Pf  ID  ®  9  ^ 

O  O  <Tl  Ol  <T> 


CHART  35.— TOBACCO:  YIELD  PER  ACRE,  N.  C.  AND  U.  S. 


CHART  36.— TOBACCO:  FARM  PRICE,  N.  C.  AND  U.  S. 


Cents  per  Pound  Pounds  per  Acre 


Dollars  pe. 


Agricultural  Graphics 


37 


CHART  37. — TOBACCO:  VALUE  PER  ACRE,  N.  C.  ARD  U.  S. 


Dollars  per  Acre 


38 


Agricultural  Graphics 


value  per  acre  North  Carolina  has  gained  157.3  percent  and  the 
United  States  only  146.9  percent. 

Our  tobacco  future  like  our  cotton  future  is  problematic,  and 
we  would  do  well  not  to  build  too  confidently  on  continued  pros¬ 
perity  sourced  predominantly  in  this  crop. 

5.  Other  Crops .  Other  crops  than  the  eight  crops  already 
considered  constitute  a  little  over  a  fifth  (20.4  percent)  of  the 
aggregate  (hypothetical)  crop  values  in  North  Carolina  on  an 
average  for  the  five-year  period  1917-21  (chart  5).  For  these 
other  crops  statistics  back  to  1866  are  not  available  except  for 
rye  and  buckwheat ;  and  the  value  of  rye  and  buckwheat  in  North 
Carolina  is  so  small  that  they  have  not  been  included  in  the  de¬ 
tailed  tables  and  charts  of  this  bulletin.  Rye  represented  only 
two-tenths  of  one  percent  of  our  aggregate  crop  values  in  the 
five-year  period  1917-21  (which  includes  the  war  period  of  in¬ 
creased  grain  production),  and  buckwheat  represented  a  much 
smaller  quantity  even  than  this. 

Of  considerably  grteater  importance  is  the  value  of  our 
peanut  crop.  We  stand  among  the  first  five  states  in  the  produc¬ 
tion  of  peanuts ;  but  comparable  statistics  for  this  crop  have  been 
compiled  only  since  1916.  On  an  average  for  the  five-year  period 
1917-21,  the  value  of  our  peanuts  amounted  to  nearly  ten  and 
three-quarters  million  dollars,  and  this  represented  two  and  a 
half  percent  of  our  aggregate  crop  values  and  an  eighth  of  the 
value  of  all  the  crops  other  than  those  which  have  been  tabulated 
and  charted  in  this  bulletin. 

Cowpeas,  soy  beans,  and  sorghum  sirup  also  represent  appre¬ 
ciable  percentages  in  our  crop  values. 

Fruit  and  truck  crops  have  not  been  reported  statistically 
in  a  way  that  makes  it  possible  to  include  them  in  tables  covering 
any  considerable  number  of  years.  They  are  very  important  in 
particular  localities,  but  do  not  represent  large  proportions  of 
our  aggregate  crop  values. 

II .  Livestock 

The  subject  of  our  livestock  becomes  increasingly  important 
as  our  production  of  cash  crops  becomes  endangered  by  boll- 
weevil  ravages  and  other  uncertainties.  It  may  even  be  to  our 
advantage  to  have  our  attention  forcibly  directed  to  this  mat- 


TABLE  X — HORSES  AND  MULES  ON  FARMS 


HORSES 

1  MULES 

NORTH  CAROLINA 

UNITED  STATES 

1  NORTH  v 

i  CAROLINA 

UNITED  STATES 

Jan.  1 

Number 

Thousands 

Price  per  head 
Jan.  1 — Dols. 

Farm  Val. 

Jan.l — 1M  Dols. 

Number 

Thousands 

Price  per  head 

Jan.  1 — Dols. 

Farm  Val. 

Jan.l — 1M  Dols 

Number 

Thousands 

Price  per  head 

Jan.  1 — Dols. 

Farm  Val. 

Jan.l — 1M  Dols. 

Number 

Thousands 

Price  per  head 

Jan.  1 — Dols. 

Farm  Val. 

Jan.l — 1M  Dols. 

1867 _ 

99 

57.81 

5,749 

5,401 

59.05 

318,924 

33 

63.37 

2,063 

822 

66.94 

55,048 

1868— 

98 

50.69 

4,990 

5,757 

54.27 

312,416 

33 

58.87 

1,936 

856 

56.04 

47/954 

1869 _ 

98 

67.77 

6,672 

6,333 

62.57 

396,222 

34 

83.16 

2,789 

922 

79.23 

73*027 

1S70 _ 

126 

76.46 

9,595 

8,249 

67.43 

556,251 

44 

96.21 

4,195 

1,180 

90.42 

106,654 

1870*.. 

108 

7 .145 

51 

1 125 

1871— 

127 

81.67 

10,348 

8,702 

71.14 

619,039 

44 

103.37 

4,590 

1,242 

91.98 

114,272 

1872— 

130 

82.99 

10,830' 

8,991 

67.41 

606,111 

46 

101.76 

4,650 

1,276 

87.14 

111,222 

1873— 

132 

80.33 

10,587 

9,222 

66.39 

612,273 

48 

99.84 

4,742 

1,310 

85.15 

11R546 

1874 _ 

132 

76.90 

10,135 

9,334 

65.15 

608,073 

48 

93.53 

4,527 

1,339 

81.35 

108,953 

1875— 

133 

70.23 

9,348 

9,504 

61.10 

580,708 

49 

85.43 

4,212 

1,394 

71.89 

100,197 

1876— 

140 

65.82 

9,195 

9,935 

57.29 

557,747 

52 

72.47 

3,747 

1,414 

66.46 

94,001 

1877— 

141 

65.15 

9,187 

10,155 

55.83 

567,017 

53 

68.46 

3,608 

1,444 

64.07 

92,482 

1878— 

142 

65.28 

9,296 

10,330 

56.63 

584,999 

55 

68.64 

3,796 

1,638 

62.03 

10R579 

1879... 

145 

56.54 

8,210 

10,939 

52.36 

572,712 

74 

60.13 

4,450 

1,713 

56.00 

95,942 

1880 _ 

147 

59.22 

8,688 

11,202 

54.75 

613,297 

75 

61.65 

4,605 

1,730 

61.26 

105,948 

18S0*- 

m 

10,357 

82 

1  813 

1881 _ 

147 

67.31 

9,874 

11,430 

58.44 

667,954 

75 

74.64 

5,576 

1,721 

69.79 

120,096 

1882-.. 

134 

65.30 

8,773 

10,522 

58.53 

615,825 

82 

73.64 

6,059 

1,835 

71.35 

130,945 

1883— 

136 

72.30 

9,811 

10,838 

70.59 

765,041 

82 

91.66 

7,542 

1,871 

79.49 

148,732 

1884 _ 

137 

77.21 

10,582 

11,170 

74.64 

833,734 

85 

84.32 

7,146 

1,914 

84.22 

161,215 

1885— 

141 

77.71 

10,970 

11,565 

73.70 

852,283 

86 

84.47 

7,230 

1,973 

82.38 

162,497 

1886 _ 

143 

74.53 

10,626 

12,078 

71.27 

860,823 

86 

83.19 

7,192 

2,053 

79.60 

163,381 

1887 _ 

143 

75.14 

10,713 

12,497 

72.15 

901,686 

88 

79.32 

6,994 

2,117 

78.91 

167,058 

1888 _ 

150 

74.59 

11,167 

13,173 

71.82 

946,096 

90 

84.13 

7,567 

2,192 

79.78 

174,854 

1889 _ 

151 

76.58 

11,579 

13,663 

71.89 

982,195 

91 

84.90 

7,712 

2,258 

79.49 

179,444 

1890— 

154 

73.58 

11,347 

14,214 

68.84 

978,517 

96 

81.84 

7,881 

2,331 

73.25 

182,394 

1890*. 

131 

Ilf, 969 

99 

2,296 

1891 _ 

147 

78.25 

11,465 

14,057 

67.00 

941,823 

98 

88.94 

8,735 

2,297 

77.88 

178,847 

1892— 

132 

78.62 

10,367 

15,498 

65.01 

1,007,594 

100 

88.13 

8,829 

2,315 

75.55 

174,882 

1893 _ 

133 

77.67 

10,344 

16,207 

61.22 

992,225 

100 

86.49 

8,630 

2,331 

70.68 

164,764 

1894 _ 

135 

72.20 

9,712 

16,081 

47.83 

769,225 

110 

77.64 

8,522 

2,352 

62.17 

146,233 

1895 _ 

140 

55.05 

7,702 

15,893 

36.29 

576,731 

110 

58.79 

6,452 

2,333 

47.55 

110,928 

1896 _ 

144 

54.36 

7,833 

15,124 

33.07 

500,140 

111 

59.31 

6,575 

2,279 

45.29 

103,204 

1897— 

146 

44.76 

6,515 

14,365 

31.51 

452,649 

111 

49.98 

5,541 

2,216 

41.66 

92,302 

1898— 

147 

47.16 

6,932 

13,961 

34.26 

478,362 

113 

53.64 

6,036 

2,190 

43.88 

96,110 

1899 _ 

147 

47.96 

7,036 

13,665 

37.40 

511,075 

111 

55.65 

6,199 

2,134 

44.96 

95,963 

1900.-- 

148 

53.50 

7,927 

13,538 

44.61 

603,969 

113 

63.47 

7,142 

2,086 

53.55 

111,717 

1900* 

159 

18,261 

136 

3,265 

1901 _ 

167 

65.46 

10,960 

16,745 

52.86 

885,200 

138 

77.67 

10,723 

2,864 

63.97 

183,232 

1902 _ 

164 

66.99 

10,991 

16,531 

58.61 

968,935 

137 

80.13 

10,953 

2,757 

67.61 

186,412 

1903 _ 

162 

71.16 

11,558 

16,557 

62.25 

1,030,706 

138 

85.54 

11,809 

2,728 

72.49 

197,753 

1904 _ 

161 

SI  .06 

13,035 

16,736 

67.93 

1,136,940 

139 

95.65 

13,337 

2,758 

78.88 

217,533 

1905 _ 

164 

87.25 

14,311 

17,058 

70.37 

1,200,310 

142 

102.92 

14,636 

2,889 

87.18 

251,840 

1906  - 

180 

98.62 

17,794 

18,719 

80.72 

1,510,890 

166 

116.80 

19,435 

3,404 

98.31 

334,681 

1907 

186 

114.00 

21,183 

19,747 

93.51 

1,846,578 

175 

136.00 

23,740 

3,817 

112.16 

428,064 

1908 

190 

107.00 

20,330 

19,992 

93.41 

1,867,530 

177 

126.00 

22,302 

3,869 

107.76 

416,939 

1909.  - 

192 

110.00 

21,120 

20,640 

95.64 

1,974,052 

179 

127.00 

22,733 

4,053 

107.84 

437,082 

91  040 

115 

4,123 

lylU _ 

1910**- 

iOO 

166 

121.00 

20,086 

19,833 

108.03 

2,142,524 

115 

137.00 

23,975 

It, 210 

120.20 

506,049 

1911 

168 

126.00 

21.168 

20,277 

111.46 

2,259,981 

178 

146.00 

25,988 

4,323 

125.92 

544,359 

1912 

173 

126.00  2l'79S 

20,509 

105.94 

2,172,694 

1S2 

144.00' 

26,208 

4,362 

120.51 

525,657 

1913 

176 

198.00  22.528 

20,567 

110.77 

2,278,222 

186 

148.00] 

27,528 

4,386 

124.31 

545,245 

1914 

180 

139.00 

25,020 

20,962 

109.32 

2,291,638 

192 

160.00 

30,720 

4,449 

123.85 

551,017 

1915 _ 

182 

130.00 

23,660 

21,195 

103.33 

2,190,102 

194 

151.00 

29,294 

4,479 

112.36 

503,271 

1910 

185 

122.00 

22,570 

21,159 

101.60 

2,149,786 

200 

140.00 

28,000 

4,593 

113.83 

522,834 

icn'7 

185 

125.00 

23*125 

21,210 

102.89 

2,182,307 

205 

150.00 

30,750 

4,723 

118.15 

558,006 

1918 

187 

140.00 

26,180 

21,555 

104.24 

2,246,970 

210 

167.00 

35,070 

4,873 

128. SI 

627,679 

1919 

181 

146.00 

26,426 

21,482 

98.45 

2,114,897 

225 

176.00 

39,600 

4,954 

135.83 

6  /  '‘It  y[)2/*2 

1920— 

111 

156.00 

26,676 

19,766 

96.51 

1,907,646 

251 

192.00 

49,344 

5,427 

148.42 

805,495 

in  yfff 

251 

5 

1920*** 

1091 

111 

166 

125.00 

20,750 

19,208 

84.31 

1,619,423 

260 

156.00 

40,560 

5,455 

116.69 

636, 56S 

1999 

166 

108.00 

17,928 

19,056 

70.54 

1,344,136 

257 

129.00 

33,153 

5,467 

88.09 

481,578 

1923— 

166 

108.00 

17,928 

18,853 

69.75 

1,314,956 

260 

128.00 

33,280 

5,506 

85.S6 

472,735 

*  Census,  June  1. 


**  Census,  April  15. 


***  Census,  January  1. 


40 


Agricultural  Graphics 


ter ;  and  it  is  by  no  means  beyond  belief  that  we  may  not  soon  be 
erecting  monuments,  as  has  come  about  elsewhere,  in  gratitude 
to  that  gobble-un  that  will  surely  git  us  ef  we  don’t  watch  out 
(to  quote  Little  Orphant  Annie).  But  this  result  will  be  brought 
about  only  if  we  set  to  work  promptly  to  master  the  lesson  ex¬ 
perience  is  teaching  other  states.  They  have  not  yet  learned  it 
thoroughly  and  we  are  only  now  being  compelled  to  buck  up 
against  it ;  and  to  this  fact  in  some  measure  are  due  the  strides  we 
have  made  ahead  of  some  of  our  southern  competitors.  But  our 
hour  is  at  hand,  and  we  must  look  facts  in  the  face. 

Our  livestock  level  is  pitifully  low.  Only  four  states  fall 
below  us  when  the  states  are  ranked  according  to  their  status  in 
percent  of  a  lightly  stocked  farm  area.  And  when  it  comes  to 
pure-bred  livestock,  only  two  states  (South  Carolina  and  Louisi¬ 
ana)  stand  below  us  in  percent  of  farms  reporting  one  or  more 
pure-bred  horses,  dairy  cows,  beef  cattle,  sheep,  or  swine. 
Furthermore,  in  livestock  values  per  farm  in  1920,  only  Ala¬ 
bama  is  below  us,  and  that  by  a  single  dollar,  while  South  Caro¬ 
lina,  next  above  us,  has  thirty-three  dollars  per  farm  more  in 
livestock  values  than  we.  See  tables  in  the  University  News  Let¬ 
ter ,  Vol.  VIII,  Nos.  29  and  32,  and  Vol.  IX,  No.  1. 

Moreover,  looking  in  detail  at  the  figures  shown  in  Tables  X 
to  XII,  it  is  plain  that  we  have  made  relatively  little  progress  in 
livestock  in  the  fifty-seven  years  considered  in  this  bulletin. 

Horses  and  Mules.  Horses  and  mules  (Table  X)  make  the 
best  showing,  because  they  are  indispensable  work  animals.  But 
while  our  horses  were  increasing  68  percent  (from  99,000  in  1867 
to  166,000  in  1923),  the  horses  in  the  United  States  at  large  were 
increasing  249  percent  (from  5,4-01,000  in  1867  to  18,853,000 
in  1923).  In  mules  we  more  than  kept  pace  with  the  United 
States  in  percent  of  increase ;  we  have  nearly  eight  times  as  many 
mules  now  as  in  1867  (260,000  now,  compared  with  33,000  at  the 
earlier  date),  whereas  the  United  States  at  large  has  less  than 
seven  times  as  many  now  as  in  1867  (5,506,000  compared  with 
822,000). 

The  curves  of  trend  in  price  for  horses  and  for  mules  are 
very  similar  (charts  38  and  39).  In  both  cases  the  North  Caro¬ 
lina  price  is  higher  than  the  United  States  price,  and  in  both 
cases  there  has  been  a  greater  increase  in  price  in  North  Caro- 


Agricultural  Graphics 


41 


CHART  39. — MULES:  FARM  PRICE,  N.  C.  AND  U.  S. 


TABLE  XI— CATTLE  ON  FARMS 


MILCH  COWS 


NORTH  CAROLINA  UNITED  STATES 


n 

c3 


w 

73 
U  A 

C  d 
_D  2C 

d  d 
5  c 


rd 

Si2 

rC  o 
mQ 
©  I 
ft  | 

C  rH 

o 

•r?  ^ 

®s 

Ph  >“3 


o 

Q 


cS  pi 
Pm 


OQ 

73 

*  c 

C  cc 
o  -J1 

S§ 


cfi 

<d  £ 

£  o 

nQ 

©  | 
ft  | 

©  rH 

•2  ri 

Pt  ce 

Ph  i-s 


o 

A 


(S' 


u  2 
03  P 

Pm^ 


OTHER  CATTLE 


NORTH 

CAROLINA 


00 
*  s 

©  c3 
r>  a: 

£EH 


73 

©J£ 

rC  O 

Sr  Q 
O  I 

p<  I 

Cl  T— I 

|s 


ifl 

o 

O 

iS 


cS  P) 

Pm  =« 

ft 


UNITED 

STATES 


OO 
T3 
Mi  Pi 
©  cS 

X?  CG 

3g 


c  ^ 

rd  o 

Srfi 
©  I 

ft  I 

©  tH 

•a  Pi 

»H  c3 

Ph  t-s 


co 

o 

ft 

I  s 


c3  i 

K* 


«  s 

Pi  Is8 


1  l-B 


L867 _ 

1868— 

1869  _ 

1870  _ 

1870*.. 

204 

204 

206 

206 

197 

14.90 

13.73 

15.27 

16.94 

3,032 

2,795 

3,140 

3,481 

8,349 

8,692 

9,248 

10,096 

8,935 

28.74 

26.56 

29.15 

32.70 

239,947 

230,817 

269,610 

330,175 

293 

287 

281 

296 

32k 

6.69 

6.74 

8.19 

9.19 

1,961 

1,935 

2,305 

2,716 

11,731 

11,942 

12,185 

15,388 

14,885 

15.79 

15.06 

18.73 

18.87 

185,254 

179,888 

228,183 

290,401 

1871 _ 

203 

20.39 

4,147 

10,023 

33.89 

339,701 

298 

9.65 

2,879 

16,212 

20.78 

336,860 

1872— 

205 

20.06 

4,121 

10,304 

29.45 

303,438 

307 

9.58 

2,943 

16,390 

18.12 

296,932 

1873-- 

201 

15.15 

3,048 

10,576 

26.72 

282,559 

316 

8.74 

2,767 

16,414 

18.06 

296,448 

1874 _ 

199 

14.09 

2,806 

10,705 

25.63 

274,326 

316 

8.53 

2,699 

16,218 

17.55 

284,706 

1875 _ 

197 

14.32 

2,823 

10,907 

25.74 

280,701 

310 

7.88 

2,443 

16,313 

16.91 

275,872 

1876 _ 

201 

13.59 

2,732 

11,085 

25.61 

283,879 

313 

8.95 

2,802 

16,785 

17.00 

285,387 

1877 _ 

203 

14.14 

2,871 

11,261 

25.47 

286,778 

316 

9.85 

3,116 

17,956 

15.99 

287,156 

1878— 

230 

15.05 

3,461 

11,300' 

25.74 

290,898 

420 

9.30 

3,906 

19,223 

16.72 

321,346 

1879 _ 

232 

22.20 

5,157 

11,826 

21.71 

256,721 

416 

8.17 

3,398 

21,408 

15.38 

329,254 

1880— 

230 

12.60 

2,898 

12,027 

23.27 

279,899 

416 

8.31 

3,455 

21,231 

16.10 

341,761 

1880*.. 

232 

12M3 

Jf25 

23,482 

1881 _ 

230 

13.46 

3,096 

12,369 

23.95 

296,277 

407 

8.77 

3,574 

20,939 

17.33 

362,862 

1882 _ 

230 

14.03 

3,224 

12,612 

25.S9 

326,489 

430 

10.25 

4,403 

23,280 

19.89 

463,070 

1883 _ 

237 

17.18 

4,067 

13,126 

30.21 

396,575 

428 

10.68 

4,572 

28,946 

21.81 

611,549 

1884— 

234 

17.00 

3,984 

13,501 

31.37 

423, 4S7 

420 

10.84 

4,547 

29,046 

23.52 

683,229 

1885 _ 

241 

17.00 

4,103 

13,905 

29.70 

412,903 

428 

11.91 

5,096 

29,867 

23.25 

691,383 

1886 _ 

239 

16.65 

3,979 

14,235 

27.40 

389,986 

424 

10.24 

4,339 

31,275 

21.17 

661,956 

1887 _ 

241 

15.75 

3,801 

14,522 

26.08 

378,790 

419 

9.99 

4,188 

33,512 

19.79 

663,138 

1888— 

244 

16.00' 

3,900 

14,856 

24.65 

366,252 

419 

10.99 

4,607 

34,378 

17.79 

611,751 

1889 _ 

247 

16.50 

4,082 

15,299 

23.94 

366,226 

419 

11.41 

4,783 

35,032 

17.05 

597,237 

1890 _ 

272 

16.04 

4,365 

15,953 

22.14 

353,152 

398 

10.47 

4,170 

36,849 

15.21 

560,625 

1890*.. 

223 

16,512 

lt07 

33,734 

1891 _ 

267 

17.50 

4,667 

16,020 

21.62 

346,398 

390 

11.12 

4,343 

36,876 

14.76 

544,128 

1892 _ 

269 

17.60 

4,741 

16,416 

21.40 

351,378 

390 

11.59 

4,527 

37,051 

15.16 

570,749 

1893— 

272 

16.50 

4,489 

16,424 

21.75 

357,300 

383 

11.14 

4,262 

35,054 

15.24 

547,882 

1894 _ 

275 

14.99 

4,119 

16,487 

21.77 

358,999 

386 

11.15 

4,308 

36,608 

14.66 

536,790 

1895 _ 

275 

14.66 

4,028 

16,505 

21.97 

362,602 

379 

9.58 

3,629 

34,364 

14.06 

482,999 

1896 _ 

272 

14.40 

3,917 

16,138 

22.55 

363,956 

364 

10.12 

3,680 

32,085 

15.86 

508,928 

1897— 

267 

13.75 

3,666 

15,942 

23.16 

369,240 

345 

9.55 

3,300 

30,508 

16.65 

507,929 

1898— 

259 

14.70 

3,802 

15,841 

27.45 

434,814 

321 

9.92 

3,188 

29,264 

20.92 

612,297 

1899.. _ 

248 

15.90 

3,947 

15,990 

29.66 

474,234 

296 

10.86 

3,211 

27,994 

22.79 

637,931 

1900 _ 

243 

18.20 

4,428 

16,292 

31.60 

514,812 

275 

12.31 

3,384 

27,610 

24.97 

689,486 

1900*.. 

233 

17,136 

391 

50,586 

1901 _ 

214 

18.89 

4,045 

16,834 

30.00’ 

505,093 

356 

9.79 

3,485 

45,500 

19.93 

906,644 

1902 _ 

206 

18.74 

3,852 

16,697 

29.23 

488,130 

327 

9.59 

3,141 

44,728 

18.76 

839,126 

1903 _ 

201 

19.81 

3,991 

17,105 

30.21 

516,712 

308 

9.84 

3,029 

44,659 

18.45 

824,055 

1904 _ 

197 

22.36 

4,415 

17,420 

29.21 

508,841 

299 

10.74 

3,207 

43,629 

16.32 

712,178 

1905.. _ 

193 

20.90 

4,044 

17,572 

27.44 

482,272 

302 

10.37 

3,127 

43,669 

15.15 

661,571 

1906 _ 

259 

27.10 

7,026 

19,794 

29.44 

582,789 

437 

10.98 

4,803 

47,068 

15.85 

746,172 

1907— 

283 

24.00 

6,782 

20,968 

31.00 

645,497 

446 

12.00 

5,200 

51,566 

17.10 

881,557 

1908— 

294 

24.00 

7,056 

21,194 

30.67 

650,057 

450 

12.00 

5,400 

50,073 

16.89 

845,938 

1909.. _ 

294 

25.00 

7,350 

21,720 

32.36 

702,945 

454 

11.50 

5,221 

49,379 

17.49 

863,754 

1910... 

309 

21  801 

392 

47,279 

_ 

_ 

1910**. 

309 

25.50 

7,880 

20,625 

35.29 

727,802 

392 

12.50 

4,900 

41,178 

19.07 

785,261 

1911  — 

312 

28.00 

8,736 

20,823 

39.97 

832,209 

388 

13.40 

5,199 

39,679 

20.54 

815,184 

1912— 

312 

28.00 

8,736 

20,699 

39.39 

815,414 

3S0 

12.60 

4,788 

37,260 

21.20 

790,064 

1913— 

312 

30.10 

9,391 

20,497 

45.02 

922,783 

372 

14.90 

5,543 

36,030 

26.36 

949,645 

1914— 

309 

35.10 

10,846 

20,737 

53.94 

1,118,487 

365 

17.30 

6,314 

35,855 

31.13 

1,116,333 

1915— 

315 

36.50 

11,498 

21,262 

55.33 

1,176,338 

369 

17.00 

6,273 

37,067 

33.38 

1,237,376 

1916— 

321 

34.00 

10,914 

22,108 

53.92 

1,191,955 

375 

16.80’ 

6,300 

39,812 

33.53 

1,334,928 

1917— 

315 

39.00 

12,285 

22,894 

59.63 

1,365,251 

364 

19.40 

7,062 

41,689 

35.88 

1,497,621 

1918 _ 

309 

51.00 

15,759 

23,310 

70.54 

1,644,231 

375 

24.80 

9,300 

44,112 

40.88 

1,803,482 

1919 _ 

315 

69.00 

21,735 

23,475 

78.20 

1,835,770 

379 

31.90 

12,090 

45,085 

44.22 

1,993,442 

1920 _ 

S5J, 

78.00 

27,612 

23,722 

85.86 

2,036,750 

291 

32.00 

9,312 

43,398 

43.21 

1,875,043 

1920*** 

35Jf 

23  722 

291 

43,398 

1921 ... 

361 

5S.OO 

20,938 

23,594 

64.22 

1,515,249 

285 

24.20 

6,897 

41,993 

31.36 

1,316,727 

1922__ _ 

365 

42.00 

15,330 

24,082 

50.98 

1,227,703 

274 

17.30 

4,740 

41,550 

23.80 

988,760 

1923 _ 

365 

39.00 

14,235 

24,429 

50.83 

1,241,673 

274 

17.10 

4,685 

41,923 

25.67 

1,076,254 

*  Census,  June  1. 


**  Census,  April  15. 


***  Census,  January  1 


Dollars  per  Mead 


Agricultural  Graphics 


43 


cn  _  u->  r-  a~,  —  o-ioc^<n  —  cniQ^-c\  —  cn  m  5  N  ri 

|!|fc&|fe|llai3SS8S2S2§l§22ffi2  2.2 

5 


s  S  3 

~  T3 

33  SO 
JIM 

29.ro 


23.50 
21.00 
10  50 
16.00 
1350 
1100 
9  50 
600 


Dollars  per  Head 


44 


Agricultural  Graphics 


lina  than  in  the  United  States,  which  has  widened  the  gap  be¬ 
tween  our  price  and  the  price  for  the  United  States  as  a  whole. 
Both  curves  are  declining  since  the  high  prices  of  the  war  period, 
and  they  are  at  present  below  their  pre-war  level.  Automobiles 
and  farm  motors  are  no  doubt  exercising  a  greater  influence 
on  prices  for  these  animals  in  the  country  at  large  than  in  North 
Carolina;  hence  our  higher  percentage  of  gain  in  farm  price. 

Cattle.  Our  increase  in  number  of  dairy  cattle  in  1923  over 
1867  (Table  XI)  was  only  79  percent  (365,000  compared  with 
204,000),  while  the  similar  increase  in  the  United  States  at  large 
was  193  percent  (24,429,000  compared  with  8,349,000).  Our 
other  cattle  actually  dwindled  in  number — they  are  six  percent 
fewer  in  1923  than  they  were  in  1867  (274,000  compared  with 
293,000)  ;  whereas  in  the  United  States  at  large  the  cattle  other 
than  dairy  cattle  are  over  three  and  a  half  times  as  many  in  1923 
as  in  1867  (41,923^000  compared  with  11,731,000).  These 
figures  are  significant  and  should  give  us  pause. 

Furthermore,  our  farm  prices  for  both  milk  cows  and  other 
cattle  (charts  40  and  41)  are  much  below  the  United  States  aver¬ 
ages  ;  and,  though  we  have  in  each  case  made  a  greater  percent¬ 
age  gain  in  price  per  head  than  the  United  States  as  a  whole  has 
made,  our  ten-year  average  price  (Jan.  1)  1914-23  was  only  77 
percent  of  the  United  States  ten-year  average  price  for  milk 
cows,  and  for  other  cattle  only  63  percent  of  the  United  States 
average  for  the  same  ten  years. 

Sheep.  As  for  sheep  (Table  XII),  we  seem  to  be  abandon¬ 
ing  them  altogether.  They  are  a  dwindling  quantity  in  both 
North  Carolina  and  the  United  States,  but  our  decrease,  com¬ 
paring  1923  with  1867,  was  76  percent  (81,000  compared  with 
339,000),  whereas  the  decrease  in  the  United  States  as  a  whole 
was  only  six  percent  (37,209,000  compared  with  39,385,000). 

Notwithstanding  the  fact  that  we  have  made  a  greater  per¬ 
centage  gain  in  farm  price  for  sheep  than  the  country  at  large, 
our  ten-year  average  price  (Jan.  1)  1914-23  was  still  only  76 
percent  of  the  United  States  average  farm  price  for  sheep  for 
the  same  ten  years.  Evidently  the  sheep  industry  is  not  thriving 
with  us. 

Swine.  Conditions  as  regards  swine  are  somewhat  better.  Our 
1923  number  (Table  XII)  shows  an  increase  of  nine  percent 


TABLE  XII— SHEEP  AND  SWINE  ON  FARMS 


SHEEP 


NORTH  CAROLINA 


UNITED  STATES 


SWINE 


NORTH 

CAROLINA 


UNITED 


Jan.  1 

Number 

Thousands 

Price  per  head 
Jan.  1 — Dots. 

Farm  Val. 

Jan.l — 1M  Dols. 

Number 

Thousands 

Price  per  head 

Jan.  1 — Dols. 

Farm  Val. 

Jan.l — 1M  Dols. 

Number 

Thousands 

Price  per  head 

Jan.  1 — Dols. 

Farm  Yal. 

Jan.l — 1M  Dols. 

Number 

Thousands 

Price  per  head 

Jan.  1 — Dols. 

Farm  Val. 

Jan.l — 1M  Dols. 

1867 _ 

339 

1.32 

447 

39,385 

2.50 

98,644 

1,161 

3.27 

3,797 

24,691 

4.03 

99  637 

1868--- 

326 

1.20 

390 

38,992 

1.82 

71,053 

975 

2.49 

2,432 

24,317 

3.29 

79  976 

1869 _ 

296 

1.26 

374 

37,724 

1.64 

62,037 

8  58 

3.19 

2,740 

23,31£ 

4.65 

108  431 

1870 _ 

325 

1.37 

445 

40,853 

1.96 

79,876 

850 

3.94 

3,350 

26,751 

5.80 

155,108 

1870*— 

m 

28,Jf78 

1,075 

25  185 

1871 _ 

315 

1.47 

464 

31,851 

2.14 

68,310 

842 

3.75 

3,155 

29,458 

5.61 

165  312 

1872 _ 

296 

1.44 

426 

31,679 

2.61 

82,768 

875 

2.75 

2,406 

31,796 

4.01 

127,453 

1873 _ 

293 

1.43 

421 

33,002 

2.71 

89,427 

849 

2.75 

2,330 

32,632 

3.67 

119,632 

1874 _ 

279 

1.41 

392 

33,938 

2.43 

82,353 

823 

2.60 

2,141 

30,861 

3.98 

122,695 

1875 _ 

276 

1.41 

390 

33,784 

2.55 

86,278 

807 

2.96 

2.391 

28,062 

4.80 

134,581 

1876 _ 

284 

1.39 

394 

35,935 

2.37 

85,121 

758 

3.52 

2,670 

25,727 

6.00 

154,251 

1877 _ 

281 

1.43 

401 

35,804 

2.13 

76,362 

736 

3.89 

2,863 

28,077 

5.66 

158,873 

1878 _ 

490 

1.50 

734 

35,740 

2.21 

78,S98 

1,180 

3.65 

4,304 

32,262 

4.85 

156,577 

1879 _ 

425 

1.28 

543 

38,124 

2.07 

78,965 

1,263 

2.96 

3,734 

34,766 

3.18 

110,508 

18S0 _ 

425 

1.45 

616 

40,766 

2.21 

90,231 

1,263 

3.15 

3,977 

34,034 

4.28 

145,782 

1880*— 

1/62 

1/2,192 

- 

1,1/51/ 

_ 

1/9,778 

1SS1 _ 

386 

1.35 

521 

43,570 

2.39 

104,071 

1,237 

3.20 

3,959 

36,248 

4.70 

170,535 

1882 _ 

471 

1.30 

612 

45,016 

2.37 

106,596 

1,381 

4.12 

5,689 

44,122 

5.97 

263*543 

1883 _ 

466 

1.39 

648 

49,237 

2.53 

124,366 

1 ,312 

4.15 

5,444 

43,270 

6.75 

291,951 

1884— 

452 

1.38 

624 

50,627 

2.37 

119,903 

1,364 

3.91 

5,334 

44,201 

5.57 

246,301 

1885 _ 

48S 

1.37 

669 

50,360 

2.14 

107,961 

1,433 

4.04 

5,787 

45,143 

5.02 

226,402 

1886 _ 

469 

1.28 

600 

4S,322 

1.91 

92,444 

1,347 

3.24 

4,357 

46,092 

4.26 

196,570 

1887 _ 

450 

1.28 

576 

44,759 

2.01 

89,873 

1,279 

3.35 

4,287 

44,613 

4.4S 

200,043 

1888 _ 

428 

1.36 

581 

43,545 

2.05 

89,280 

1,266 

3.53 

4,464 

44,347 

4.9S 

220,811 

1889 _ 

419 

1.37 

576 

42,599 

2.13 

90,640 

1,279 

3.76 

4,810 

50,302 

5.79 

291,307 

1890 _ 

415 

1.51 

625 

44,336 

2.27 

100,660 

1,292 

3.38 

4,368 

51,603 

4.72 

243,418 

1890 *.. 

m 

1/0,876 

1,251 

57,1/27 

1891 _ 

398 

1.70 

679 

43,431 

2.50 

108,397 

1,292 

3.36 

4,343 

50,625 

4.15 

210,194 

1892 _ 

390 

1.82 

710 

44,938 

2.58 

116,121 

1,253 

3.70 

4,640 

52,398 

4.60 

241,031 

1893 _ 

396 

1.62 

642 

47,274 

2.66 

125,909 

1,259 

4.05 

5,094 

46,095 

6.41 

295,426 

1894— 

376 

1.49 

559 

45,048 

1.98 

89,186 

1,335 

3.99 

5,329 

45,206 

5.98 

270,385 

1895 _ 

357 

1.34 

480  42,294 

1.58 

66,686 

1,442 

3.96 

5,712 

44,166 

4.97 

219,501 

1896— 

343 

1.39 

478  38,299 

1.70 

65,168 

1,427 

3.92 

5,592 

42,843 

4.35 

1S6,530 

1897 _ 

319 

1.39 

444  36,819 

1.82 

67,021 

1,456 

3.11 

4,524 

40,600 

4.10 

166,273 

1898 _ 

200 

1.47 

426 

37,657 

2.46 

92,721 

1,427 

3.03 

4,319 

39,760 

4.39 

174,351 

1899 _ 

261 

1.52 

396 

39,114 

2.75 

107,698 

1,370 

3.29 

4,504 

3S,652 

4.40 

170,110 

1900 _ 

235 

1.62 

380 

41,883 

2.93 

122,666 

1,329 

3.56 

4,725 

37,079 

5.00 

185,472 

1900*— 

}302 

61.50A 

1,800 

62,876 

1901 _ 

279 

1.73 

482  59,757 

2.98 

178,072 

1,302 

3.66 

4,770 

56,982 

6.20 

353,012 

1902 _ 

245 

1.69 

415  62,039 

2.65 

164,446 

1,094 

3.95 

4,317 

48,699 

7.03 

342,121 

1903 _ 

221 

1.79 

396  63,965 

2.63 

168,316 

1,017 

5.39 

5.482 

46,923 

7.78 

364,974 

1904— 

203 

1.98 

401  51,630 

2.59 

133,530 

1,048 

4.84 

5,071 

47,009 

6.15 

289,225 

1905 _ 

209 

1.99 

416  45,170 

2.S2 

127,332 

1,058 

4.85 

5,132 

47,321 

5.99 

283,255 

1906— 

220 

2.69 

591  50,632 

3.54 

179,056 

1,153 

4.80 

5,536 

52,103 

6.18 

321,803 

1907 _ 

224 

2.44 

546  53,240 

3.84 

204,210 

1,292 

5.30 

6,846 

54,794 

7.62 

417,791 

1908— 

220 

2.62 

576  54,631 

3.88 

211,736 

1,357 

5.60 

7,599 

56,084 

6.05 

339,030 

1909— 

222 

2.40 

533  56,084 

3.43 

192,632 

1,398 

6.30 

8,807 

54,147 

6.55 

354,794 

1910.  _ 

211/ 

57  9.16 

1,228 

47,782 

1910**. 

211/ 

2.60 

556  52, US 

4.12 

216,030 

1,228 

1  o 

l 

1*2 

1 

8,842 

58,186 

9.17 

533,309 

1911 _ 

203 

2.98 

605  53,633 

3.91 

209,535 

1,851 

7.60. 

10,268 

65,620 

9.37 

615,170 

1912 _ 

193 

2.801 

540  52,362 

3.46 

181,170 

1,405 

7.40 

10', 397 

65,410 

8.00 

523,328 

1913— 

181 

3.10 

561  51,482 

3.94 

202,779 

1,335 

7.70 

10,280 

61,178 

9.86 

603,109 

1914— 

177 

3.20 

566 

49,719 

4.02 

200,045 

1,362 

9.00 

12,258 

5S,933 

10.40 

612,951 

1915 _ 

177 

3.30 

584 

49,956 

4.50 

224,687 

1,525 

8.20 

12,505 

64,618 

9.87 

637,479 

1916— 

155 

3.20 

496 

48,625 

5.17 

251,594 

1,550 

7.80 

12,090 

67,766 

8.40 

569,573 

1917 _ 

140 

3.90 

546; 

47,616 

7.13 

339,529 

1,450 

9.70 

14,065 

67,503 

11.75 

792,898 

1918 _ 

137 

6.60 

904 

48,603 

11.82 

574,575 

1,400 

17.10 

23,940 

70,978 

19.54 

1,387,261 

1919- 

138 

8.70 

1,201 

48,866 

11.63 

568,265 

1,546 

21.00 

32,466 

74.5S4 

22.02 

L, 642, 598 

1920 

91 

39,025 

10.47 

408,586 

1,271 

59,344 

19.07 

1,131,674 

/OP/}*** 

QJ 

Q  £A! 

£71 

O.Vi 

1  271 

20.00 

25,420 

59,31/6 

1921— 

89 

6.60 

587 

37,452 

6.30 

235,855 

1,246 

15.70 

19,562 

56,097 

12.97 

727,380 

1922  _ 

84 

4.90 

412 

36,327 

4.80 

174,545 

1,258 

12.00 

15,096 

57,834 

10.07 

582,448 

1923 _ 

81 

5.60 

454 

37,209 

7.50 

278,939 

1,271 

13.30 

16,904 

33,424 

11.40 

726,699 

*  Census,  June  1.  **  Census,  April  15.  ***  Census,  January  1. 

t  Includes  spring  lambs  (N.  C.  93,000,  U.  S.  21,668,000).  In  previous  censuses 
instructions  did  not  mention  them,  and  it  is  doubtful  to  what  extent  they  were 
reported  as  sheep. 


46 


Agricultural  Graphics 


£ 


C'  -  p  to  ^  ^ 

vt>  b-  tr  b-  c-  c- 

rO  (D  <C  ®  ®  (D 


cocD<r>Qo<r»^'<r><r>cr'00  ooo  —  —  —  r:  ~  ^  Si 

cCaDaD<3DcocDcOgD<oO'»cr>  0 t>  <r» 


_  co  lo 

«  “  ‘ 

CO 


<n  —  «o> 

—  O  o  o  o 


1006 

3  50 
900 
830 
8  00 
7  30 
700 

6.30 
6  00 
5.50 
5.00 

4  50 
4.00 
350 
300 
250 
2.00 

150 
1 09 


CHART  43.— SWINE:  FARM  PRICE,  N.  C.  AND  U.  S 


Dollars  per  H»ad  Dollars  per  Head 


Agricultural  Graphics 


47 


ovei  the  1867  figures  (1,271,000  compared  with  1  161  000) 
while  in  the  United  States  as  a  whole  there  has  been  an  increase 
of  157  percent  (63,424,000  compared  with  24,  694,000). 

Our  farm  price  per  head  of  swine  (chart  43)  has  been  uni¬ 
formly  below  the  United  States  figure,  but  our  gain  in  price 
comparing  the  decades  1913-22  and  1866-75,  was  329  percent! 
while  in  the  United  States  as  a  whole  the  gain  in  price  was  only 
196  percent.  This  brings  the  North  Carolina  price  very  near  to  the 
United  States  level  i.  e.,  the  North  Carolina  ten-year  average 
farm  price  for  swine  (Jan.  1)  1914-23  was  98.7  percent  of  the 
United  States  average  for  the  same  ten  years  ($13.38  com¬ 
pared  with  $13.56).  This,  at  any  rate,  is  encouraging. 

III.  Food  Production 

1.  Food  production  as  compared  with  population.  The  rela¬ 
tion  of  food  production  to  population  in  North  Carolina  and  in 
the  United  States  cannot  be  adequately  discussed  without  closer 
study  than  has  yet  been  given  this  subject.  However,  compar- 
ing  production  and  population  in  the  several  census  years  in¬ 
cluded  in  the  fifty-seven  years  here  considered,  it  may  be  said 


TABLE  XIII— FOOD  CHOPS  AND  POPULATION  IN  N.  C. 

CENSUS  YEARS  1870-1920 


Year 

Population 

CORN 

WHEAT 

Production  in 
Preceding  Year 
Bus. 

Per  In¬ 
habitant 
Bus. 

Production  in 
Preceding  Year 
Bus. 

Per  In¬ 
habitant 
Bus. 

1870  _ 

1,071,361 

18,454,000 

17.2 

2,S60,000 

2.7 

1880 _ 

1,399,750 

28,020,000 

20.0 

3,397,000 

2.4 

1890. _  _ 

1,617,949 

25,784,000 

15.9 

4,292,000 

2.7 

1900 _ 

1,893,810 

34,819,000 

18.4 

4,342,000 

2.3 

1910 _ 

2,206,287 

34,064,000 

15.4 

3,827,000 

1.7 

1920 _ 

2,559,123 

40,998,000 

16.0 

4,745,000 

1.9 

OATS 

POTOTOES 

(All) 

Year 

Population 

Production  in 

Per  In- 

Production  in 

Per  In- 

Preceding  Year 

habitant 

Preceding  Year 

habitant 

Bus. 

Bus. 

Bus. 

Bus. 

1870 _ 

1,071,361 

3,220,000 

3.0 

3,811,000 

3.6 

1880 _ 

1,399,750 

3,838,000 

2.7 

5,299,000 

3.8 

1890 _ _ 

1,617,949 

4,513,000 

2.7 

6,864,000 

4.2 

1900 _ 

1,893,810 

2,455,000 

1.3 

7,418,000 

3.9 

1910 _ 

2,206,287 

2,783,000 

1.3 

10,865,000 

4.9 

1920 _ 

2,559,123 

1,671,000 

.7 

12,163,000 

4.8 

48 


Agricultural  Graphics 


that  North  Carolina  seems  to  be  losing  ground  in  per  capita  pro¬ 
duction  of  corn,  wheat,  and  oats,  while  gaining  in  per  capita  pro¬ 
duction  of  potatoes  and  sweet  potatoes.  In  the  United  States 
as  a  whole,  on  the  contrary,  there  would  seem  to  be  an  increasing 
per  capita  production  of  wheat  and  oats,  while  the  production  of 
corn  per  capita  in  census  years  has  varied  so  much  as  to  obscure 
the  trend ;  and  no  plainly  marked  trend  is  observable  in  per  capita 
production  of  potatoes  and  sweet  potatoes.  The  United  States, 
of  course,  is  a  surplus-producing  wheat  country,  but  in  North 
Carolina  it  may  be  noted  that  per  capita  production  of  wheat  is 
far  below  the  average  per  capita  consumption  of  wheat  in  this 
state — even  though  (because  of  our  use  of  cornmeal)  our  esti¬ 
mated  requirements  of  wheat  per  person  is  small  as  compared  with 
the  requirements  in  many  other  states. 


Agricultural  Graphics 


49 


TABLE  XIV — FOOD  ANIMALS  AND  POPULATION  IN  N.  C. 

CENSUS  YEARS  1870-1920 


Year 

Population 

MILCH  COWS 

OTHER  CATTLE 

SWINE 

Total 

Number 

Per 

Inhab¬ 

itant 

Total 

Number 

Per 

Inhab¬ 

itant 

Total 

Number 

Per 

Inhab¬ 

itant 

1S70 _ 

1880 _ 

1890  _ 

1900 _ 

1910 _ 

1920 _ _ 

1,071,361 

1,399,750 

1,617,949 

1,893,810 

2,206,287 

2,559,123 

197,000 
232,000 
223,000 
233,000 
!  309,000 
354,000 

0.18 

.17 

.14 

.12 

.14 

.14 

!  324,000 
425,000 
407,000 
391,000 
392,000 
291,000 

0.30 

.30 

.25 

.21 

.18 

.11 

1,075,000 

1,454,000 

1,251,000 

1,300,000 

1,228,000 

1,271,000 

1.00 

1.04 

.77 

.69 

.56 

.56 

£ 

£0 


8 

s 


O 
C T5 


c n 


50 


Agricultural  Graphics 


Similar  and  even  more  marked  diminution  is  found  in  food 
animals  as  compared  with  population  in  North  Carolina.  These 
facts  are  exhibited  in  Tables  XIII  and  XIV  and  in  charts  44 
and  45. 

Careful  investigation  of  this  whole  subject  would  be  of  inter¬ 
est  in  connection  with  the  effort  to  establish  ourselves  more  se¬ 
curely  on  a  self-feeding  basis. 

2.  General  considerations.  In  considering  our  standing  in 
livestock,  we  would  do  well  to  take  a  look  at  some  of  the  states 
whose  livestock  levels  are  high.  (See  University  News  Letter , 
Vol.  VIII,  No.  29.)  Iowa  stands  first  in  this  respect,  and  Iowa 
also  stands  first  in  farm  wealth  produced  per  farm  worker  and 
per  country  dweller  and  in  the  surplus  of  food  and  feed  supplies 
produced  ( University  News  Letter,  Vol.  VIII,  Nos.  25,  38, 
and  47).  Other  states  having  high  livestock  levels  stand  sim¬ 
ilarly  much  higher  than  North  Carolina  in  all  these  respects. 
These  are  all  matters  in  which  we  rank  comparatively  low,  and 
in  which  we  can  beyond  question  improve  our  status  by  paying 
to  our  farm  livestock  situation  the  attention  it  urgently  de¬ 
mands.  We  need  to  give  this  matter  such  serious  thought  as 
will  lead  us  to  cease  to  concentrate  entirely  upon  cash  crops. 
These,  though  they  bring  high  per-acre  crop  values,  leave  us 
with  farm  wealth  amounting  in  the  latest  census  year  to  some 
$684  per  country  dweller,  as  compared  with  $8,113  in  Iowa  and 
$1,836  in  the  United  States  at  large. 

Improvement  in  our  tenancy  situation  will  bring  improvement 
in  our  livestock  situation,  and  vice  versa.  This  is  a  fact  brought 
out  plainly  in  the  findings  of  the  North  Carolina  Club  at  the  Uni¬ 
versity  in  its  recent  exploration  of  the  whole  subject  of  tenancy. 
These  findings  will  repay  study ;  they  have  been  published  in 
the  Club  Year-Book  for  1921-22,  on  Farm  and  Home  Ownership. 

It  cannot  be  denied  that  there  has  been  vast  prosperity  for 
the  few  under  our  prevailing  farm  system.  But  what  of  the 
many?  Have  they  prospered  in  due  proportion? 

Cooperative  marketing  is  calculated  to  play  a  big  part  in  pre¬ 
serving  for  the  many  some  abiding  financial  fruits  of  their  labor. 
But  cooperative  marketing  of  cash  crops  alone  cannot  establish 
a  high  standard  of  living  in  our  country  regions.  Food  and 
feed  crops,  home-raised  bread  and  meat,  are  essentials  if  we  are 


Agricultural  Graphics 


51 


to  retain  any  considerable  proportion  of  the  wealth  we  produce. 
And  these  are  generally  characteristic  of  a  home-owning  civi¬ 
lization,  towards  which  we  must  direct  our  efforts.  The  recent 
appointment  of  a  commission  to  study  the  matter  of  state-aid 
to  assist  farmers  in  owning  their  own  homes  is  a  step  in  the 
right  direction.  Such  study  must  not  be  allowed  to  languish. 
It  must  be  pushed  forward  until  logical  conclusions  are  reached, 
and  then  acted  upon  with  the  promptitude  and  firmness  that 
have  characterized  much  of  our  state  legislation  in  recent  years. 

But  the  main  portion  of  our  necessary  readjustments  must 
come  from  the  farmers  themselves.  Their  prosperity  in  the  main 
is  in  their  own  hands  if  they  will  read  aright  the  lessons  taught 
by  experience  in  this  state  and  the  South  generally.  The  state 
institutions  of  learning  are  eager  to  help  them  with  these  lessons, 
which  are  not  easy  to  digest  without  the  aid  of  trained  minds. 
But  surely  we  may  end  on  a  note  of  optimism,  since,  beyond  ques¬ 
tion,  the  opportunity  for  training  is  more  and  more  available  and 
is  more  and  more  welcomed  and  embraced  by  our  rising  generation. 


EXTENSION  LEAFLETS 


Yol.  I,  No. 

Vol.  I,  No. 

Vol.  I,  No. 
Vol.  I.  No. 

Vol.  II,  No. 
Vol.  II,  No. 

Vol.  II,  No. 
Vol.  II,  No. 

Vol.  II,  No. 
Vol.  Ill,  No. 


10.  Selections  for  Speaking  in  the  Public  Schools.— I:  Lee,  Lincoln 
and  W ashington  Anniversaries.  Price  10c. 

12.  American  Ideals  in  American  Literature — A  Syllabus.  Price 

10c. 

1-4,  National  Ideals  in  British  and  American  Literature.  Prico  50c 

16.  The  Community  Pageant.  An  Agency  for  the  Promotion  of 
Democracy.  Price  10c. 

4.  The  American  University  and  the  New  Nationalism.  Free. 

5.  A  Syllabus  of  Comparative  Government  and  National  Ideals. 

Price  25c. 

0.  Reconstruction  and  Citizenship.  Free. 

7.  Studies  in  the  Social  and  Industrial  Condition  of  Women  as 
Affected  by  the  War.  Price  10c. 

9.  Sanitation  in  the  South.  Price  25c. 

2.  Country  Home  Comforts  and  Conveniences  Series.  Parts  I 

and  II.  Free. 


Vol.  Ill,  No.  4.  Physical  Education.  Free. 

Vol.  Ill,  No.  7.  Our  Heritage.  A  Study  through  Literature  of  the  American 

Tradition.  For  Women’s  Clubs.  Price  35c. 

Vol.  Ill,  No.  8.  The  Consolidation  of  Rural  Schools.  Price  25c. 

Vol.  Ill,  Nos.  9  &  10.  Development  of  Farm  Water  Power,  Country  nome  Com¬ 
forts  and  Conveniences.  Series  No.  I,  Part  III.  Free. 

Vol.  IV,  No.  1.  Constructive  Ventures  in  Government :  A  Manual  of  Discussion 

and  Study  of  Woman’s  New  Part  in  the  Newer  Ideals  of 
Citizenship.  For  Women’s  Clubs.  Price  50c. 

Vol.  IV,  No.  2.  Construction  of  Farm  Telephone  Lines.  Country  Home  Com¬ 
forts  and  Conveniences.  Series  No.  I,  Part  IV.  Free. 

Vol.  IV,  No.  5.  Community  and  Government.  A  Manual  of  Discussion  and 

Study  of  the  Newer  Ideals  of  Citizenship.  Price  50c. 

Vol.  IV,  No.  6.  Music  in  the  Public  Schools.  Free. 

Vol.  IV,  No.  7.  A  Study  Course  in  Modern  Drama.  For  Women’s  Clubs. 

Price  50c. 

Vol.  IV,  No.  8.  Community  Music  Methods  and  Materials.  Free. 

Vol.  IV,  No.  9.  High  School  Athletic  Contests.  Free. 

Vol.  IV,  No.  10.  A  Study  Course  in  American  Literature.  For  Women’s  Clubs. 

Price  50c. 


MONEY  ORDER,  CHECK  OR  STAMPS  ACCEPTED 


ADDRESS:  UNIVERSITY  EXTENSION  DIVISION, 
Chapel  Hill,  N.  C. 


UNIVERSITY  OF  NORTH  CAROLINA  EXTENSION 

BULLETIN 

Published  twice  a  month,  September,  October,  November,  December, 
and  once  a  month,  January,  February,  March,  April,  May,  June. 

Succeeding:  and  combining  University  of  North  Carolina  Exten¬ 
sion  Leaflets,  Volumes  I-IV,  and  The  University  of  North  Carolina 
Record,  Extension  Series  1-41. 


